InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

meirluc

03/10/24 8:03 PM

#677691 RE: Doc logic #677671

Doc, most of the time I believe you are on the right track but I
do not agree that the crossover group had a significant number
of pseudo progressors. in fact I would not be surprised if non
of the 64 crossovers fit that category

My reasoning is that of the 99 original placebos, the group
of 35 original placebos were mostly the sicker subgroup with
a relatively short PFS and a shorter than average mPFS They
therefore also had a short mOS and therefore were judged
not likely to benefit from DCVax-L. In contrast to the
64 crossovers, those 35 permanent placebos were the less
robust subgroup in that original group of 99 patients.

OTOH, not only did the more robust group of 64 crossovers have
a long mOS of 13.2 months after progression but also most of the
members of that group lived well past 20 months from randomization.
I therefore estimate that the mPFS of that group may have been
significantly longer than 7-8 months, long enough to exclude any pseudo
progressors from the trial.
Bullish
Bullish