Replies to post #650290 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[Doc logic]

flipper44,

Because the thoroughness of one like Dr. Linda Liau is not on their editorial board?; ). Seems SNO did themselves a big disservice. Best wishes.

[exwannabe]

OMG, it was editor’s choice. So much for peer review. Why does the editorial board at SNO’s Neuro-Oncology not understand the difference between time from surgery and time from randomization?

LMAO, so now SNO is incompetent.

The 2 papers did report very different OS numbers. That the first used a bogus "from surgery" date just identifies the cause of the problem.

Nor does this change the numerous other issues addressed in the paper.

The NWBO paper has probably got more critical counters in major journals than any comparable trial I can think of. And the SNO editorial board are not clowns.

How many people are you guys calling to call out for criticizing the -L P3 paper? All on the take or incompetent. Sure.

Maybe the reality is that the -L trial really was flawed?

[Baxers]

Did you see why it is Editor's Choice? Because E. Antonio Chiocca, M.D one of the listed authors of the article is low and behold also one of the Associate Editors for the Journal. Check it out here:
https://academic.oup.com/neuro-oncology/pages/Editorial_Board

If anyone would like to take him up on the errors in his paper then then email address listed in the paper itself is:
[e-mail]

I strongly recommend you do!

[iclight]

OMG, most of the authors have been published articles regarding GBM more than all on the JAMA paper combined.

Keep character assassinating. Typical.