InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Dox_Dox

12/08/22 6:26 PM

#546081 RE: flipper44 #546077

I believe there is some exciting news the next few weeks. Next week I expect a partnership announcement- involving a company that provided grants to Dr L of UCLA. Then another big announcement in January. That will cause an explosion in stock price. We will see a record number of shares traded and then they can unload the shares authorized at that time and it won’t be felt. As far as those that worry about Dr. F. over at StatNews- forget him. I don’t think - as those who are connecting the dots - I don’t think karma will be on his side. It’s tragic that StatNews can’t get right what JAMA got right- so ask yourself what the medical community thinks of him and StatNews? You can rest easy knowing you are probably right. Peace out.
icon url

flipper44

12/08/22 7:07 PM

#546104 RE: flipper44 #546077

If it were my design(which it isn’t), I’d want at least two experimental arms. One with a lower Temodar dose to still interfere with DNA tumor cell repair but not high enough to interfere with DCVax-l instructed t-cells. (Arm 1) And a second arm with the same lower dose, but also shortened course of treatment. (Arm 2) (of course, both arms would also have DCVax-l)

It is conceivable the lowered dose of Temodar with regular DCVax-l dosing (Aka arm 1) might allow Temodar to function interrupting dna tumor cell repair over a longer period of time without efficacy decay, because it would not be interfering nearly as much with immune cell efficacy.