It showed that the trial's designed primary endpoint failed.
It oddly failed to disclose the secondary endpoint of OS between the 232 and 99 but that does not make it fabricated. . It did disclose that there really was an efficacy IA in 2015 that would have let NWBO know the status of the original primary endpoint. Kind f makes changing the endpoint after that post hoc. Even the reason for the endpoint changes presented in the paper was based on information from the trial.
The paper was very clear that the randomized trial failed.
Sure, the data from a select group of patients (about 30% of those screened, and that understates the issue because the initial stated screen was restricted). Select patients who have near total resections and are not rapid progressors and they live long. Those patients also lived as long in the ECAs .Just the ECA did not have as many.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
