Replies to post #515049 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[hoffmann6383]

LOL, more bullshit. Link to the basis of this opinion please!

Have a good one pal! by.

[Doc logic]

exwannabe,

Actually it may have been a Phase 1 headed to a Phase 2. I am so used to going from memory that I may have got that one mixed up, but yes, there were vet applications in a modified form of L administered to dogs. Linda had a vet subsidiary at one time. Best wishes.

[sentiment_stocks]

And yet, Steven Brem, M.D. a neurosurgeon and a professor of Neurosurgery at UPenn, has indicated that he is very impressed with the results from the DCVax-L P3 trial.

https://www.med.upenn.edu/apps/faculty/index.php/g275/p8483396

What I remember is that UofPen ran a P1 with DCVax in ovarian. They were so unimpressed that they withdrew the planned P2 and instead used a very different DC technology in future trials. ~ exwannabe

I don't think they were unimpressed, but I think instead the UPenn Ovarian researchers may have opted to move forward with the CAR-T technology, and or their own version of a DC vaccine.

Carl H. June, referred to be some as the Father of CAR-T immunotherapy, is considered one of its pioneers, and he was involved in that P1 trial you were just disparaging So, like I said, I think he chose to pursue the CAR-T technology.

The P1 ovarian trial was done for safety, and it's my opinion they ran it at UPenn, so they could then use DCVax-L (or the manner in which it was being manufactured) in the P2 Brain trial (that then became the P3 Brain trial).

That is my opinion, and I could be wrong.

But the P2 trial (now the P3 trial) had been using the name "DCVax-Brain", and that name was changed in the history section of the P3 trial to "DCVax-L" when the UPenn trial was over around 2010. I believe that the "vanguard cohort" (the group prior to the 2009 hold due to lack of financing) had been given "Brain", and the "restart cohort" had been given L.

You'll probably remember that we had these conversations, primarily Pyrrhonian and I, when discussing the age of the patent.