Replies to post #521593 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[The Danish Dude]

And you missed that NWBO announced they failed to meet the original primary endpoint of their Phase 3 clinical trial.

I'm quite confounded, but do you have a subscription on Ihub, that somehow only makes you read your own postings?

Because it seems as though, you've missed the couple of thousands of postings - including Roman516's - that have refuted all of your arguments with ease the last 5 months.

[pgsd]

I am happy to go with what Internationally Renowned Neurosurgeon and Accomplished Researcher Dr. Linda M. Liau is presenting to her peers at SNO in November, anything else is just noise :-)

CTIM-27 - Autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccination improves survival in patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma: survival results from a phase 3 trial
Plenary Abstract Presenter: Linda M. Liau, MD PhD – University of California, Los Angeles

https://www.eventscribe.net/2022/SNO/agenda.asp?startdate=11/20/2022&enddate=11/20/2022&BCFO=&pfp=Browse%20By%20Day&mode=&fa=&fb=&fc=&fd=

[Roman516]

I didn't miss anything as the original endpoint was a statistical end point estimate, but the OS data provided itself, and the proof is that DCVax-L works.

[CherryTree1]

The Truth about the initial primary checkpoint
. . . and from Seeking Alpha which would not be hailed as a friend and pumper of NWBO.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4513591-northwest-bio-buy-again-wait-for-regulatory-process

Pseudoprogression is a common enough phenomenon in immune therapies, and diagnostic techniques - see here - have been studied to try and distinguish a pseudoprogression from a real progression. Outside of diagnostic techniques, a good way, where possible, is to ignore progression altogether and go with an OS endpoint - exactly what NWBO has done.

In plainspeak, when you take an immunotherapy medicine, the drug activity itself may cause the tumor to get inflamed, basically acting as if disease has progressed. However, if the progression then subsides, a simple PFS endpoint is not going to be able to measure it. What is then needed is overall survival, which can tell us whether the progression was real - causing death, for instance - or it was fake, subsiding later to produce a complete or partial response, and ultimately improving overall survival.

This is exactly what happened with the DCVax-L trial. Before data was unblinded, they changed the PFS endpoint to a much more robust OS endpoint, and they saw success - so if bears are telling you otherwise, be sure you know what is happening.

Dr Linda Liau, the originator of the DCVax-L therapy, has consistently been aware of, and tried to avoid, pseudoprogression from the trial.

Again and again and again
Before data was unblinded, they changed the PFS endpoint to a much more robust OS endpoint,

Before data was unblinded, they changed the PFS endpoint to a much more robust OS endpoint,

Before data was unblinded, they changed the PFS endpoint to a much more robust OS endpoint,

which is perfectly acceptable so long as it is done before unblinding. When it is all said and done Overall Survival and safety are the only things that really matter.