Funny no mention of the FDA partial trial hold in the publication -- wonder why?? Guess they never told the peer-reviewers. They they don't seem to have included the fact the naive OS endpoint had been statistically manipulated in an attempt to compensate for the confounding -- the double DCVax-L dosing when the comparators were not screened for dosing frequency.
Whole lot missed in the publication -- all relevant the the validity of the results. FDA will have plenty to investigate that the peer-reviewers seemed to not have been shown.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
