InvestorsHub Logo

hope4patients

07/02/22 7:02 PM

#492113 RE: GermanCol #492109

Excellent post, as usual.

sentiment_stocks

07/03/22 4:26 PM

#492179 RE: GermanCol #492109


This is not a fact:


Any 5 year survivors in the 35 patient population were patients that did not cross so did not receive DCVax-L.



I actually do think that what ex states is a fact (although I believe the number is more like 33 rather than 35.

What is a fact is that any 5 year survivors in the 35 patient population were not part of any of the two arms reported (nGBM and rGBM). And this is totally different. You can not assure they didn't cross or didn't receive DCVax.



These 33 or 35 patients were NOT part of the rGBM group reported on by Mulholland and Ashkan because these patients are not being used to measure the secondary endpoint. The secondary endpoint took those patients from the trial's own randomized control arm that received DCVax-L, and compared them to the assembled ECA. Had these 33 or 35 patients ever received DCVax-L, they would have been part of that 64 patient group.

These 33 or 35 patients will eventually figure into the 4th secondary endpoint.

I believe very strongly that these assertions are the actual facts.