Replies to post #538336 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[Dr Bala]

This doesn't make any sense. Read HyGro's post first on what it says before you reply.

[jon_k84]

Not all of us… I for one have no problem with Optune. Don’t see why it can’t coexist with DCVax.

In fact, Steven Toms, highly decorated doctor involved in the NWBO trial has stated that he has only seen two treatments that extend the life of patients with GBM beyond 5 years - Optune and DCVax.

[SkyLimit2022]

Well, that’s a generalization about those who support murcidencel. There is room for other emerging technologies and we need more research and more discovery. Having differing technologies can further enlighten our understanding of cancer or perhaps be used in combo with each other.

https://edhub.ama-assn.org/jn-learning/audio-player/18738384

[biosectinvestor]

I’m not saying that. I just don’t think it is standard of care necessarily. It is an adjuvant treatment to baseline and I see no reason why some patients may not want to use it, if their insurance will cover it. It’s not systemic and probably not a realistic long-term treatment. I would not choose it OVER DCVax-L plus the standard, but I think if one had a choice and it was available and one were willing to put up with it, on recurrence it would be an option.

[dennisdave]

NWBO longs are calling BS on Optune data published in a peer reviewed JAMA article,

NO NWBO longs are calling BS on extrapolating Optune data after 3 years of OS and some other crappy ways the article has been crafted.
Mathematically the method used in the JAMA Optune article which can be found here
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2666504 may be correct however, large parts of the article are based on very little, guessed, or corrupt data to back it up. Also, the Optune article is only endorsed by Roger Stupp, MD, Lou and Jean Malnati, the DCVAXL JAMA article is endorsed by 75 MDs. To make matter worse only Drs Stupp, Ram, and Kirson had full access to all of the data in the Optune study.

So there are JAMA articles and there are high-quality JAMA articles. Having said that I still dont understand why JAMA allowed having such a crappy article on the Optune study, published in its highly esteemed Journal in 2017.

[JimSmith111]

In my opinion this is a gross oversimplification.

I find the application of the extremely general to something that should be more nuanced to be really not very on point at all.

In fairness by all means let me know the optune nuance I am missing lol.