Exactly. For its limitations and the fact that it is only a device, of course the journal review was valid for Optune.
It’s also that despite JAMA, the method of action of Optune, it only works on recurred cancer cells, must be worn at least 18 hours a day, maybe forever, it’s only a localized treatment, not systemic and it’s outrageous cost make the skull cap impractical for some healthcare systems to embrace. But of course it was a valid and very meaningful review of a trial, which by the terms of a device like that, is not required to be as rigorous as a drug.
But the journal review for DCVax-L is also good. And we know it is a systemic treatment, that it is much easier on patients to comply with it’s requirements and that the longer they live, the less it effectively costs per month, rather than the opposite with Optune.
Plus, DCVax works by making the immune system effective at fighting the cancer and has the potential, once approved, to make other immunotherapies far more effective, potentially extending survival and maybe even what looks like a cure post 5 years, to an even larger set of patients.
But there is no reason to discount that both treatments were peer reviewed and of course both should be approved ultimately for advancing the level of treatment available to gbm patients. Also, by the way, DCVax-L, upon approval, can easily be extended to other cancers as a targeted drug and cell therapy, under the 21st Century Cures Act, with real world evidence. So that should be exciting given that it is a systemic and not just a localized treatment.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
