I fully agree. We all know there has been a delay to submission based solely on trial method production so the question is why. For many years NWBO has been laying down the groundwork for a strategy to move future trials forward at a rapid pace or find a way to avoid them if at all possible. Biomarkers discovered through proteomics allows for this to happen now BUT tissue agnostic designation also requires a means to meet demand from that designation which is why I believe Edens must be far enough along to be able to catch up to otherwise OVERWHELMING demand. No one wants to announce a pathway towards a cure with only very few able to walk on that pathway because it is too narrow or the boat is too small to carry you there. Best wishes.
hyperopia, I agree with your thoughts on the status/future of the sought after indications, could be amazingly broad but will require significant connective data from MOA to markers across all indications. It is appearing they have been doing that work but I don't think they are able to hit that ball out of the park at this time. Great to think they are hot on that trail though. Good posts, thx.
I agree hyperopia, it was particularly striking to me that by pulsing the patient’s own dendritic cell, with the patient’s own tumor lysate, DCVax-L is able to personalize and target all of the patient’s tumor(s) antigens, neo-antigens, peptides, mutations and biomarkers. Not just a few or limited number of specific antigens, peptides, biomarkers and mutations.
In my mind, that make DCVax-L and DCVax Direct, the ultimate and most perfect, tumor and tissue agnostic solid tumor cancer treatments:
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
