You have been bullshitting a lot, which only corroborate you are a fake Ph.D.
See this collaboration trial between Merck and NWBO on colorectal cancer. Had they published any results on the trial, could Merck have acquired Immune Design for $300m for its TLR4?
Instead of posting nonsense all the time, you need to read all the publications on DCVax-L and do an extensive literature review. You didn't receive training like this when you studied for your fake Ph.D., did you?
For DCVax-L, the most important part is not about OS or PFS even though these are important measures. The most important part is whether it can trigger massive and sustainable t-cell infiltration into tumor sites of all types of solid tumors. Then all these inhibitors that only work in presence of t-cells will improve the efficacy. Do you get it now?
What is the occurrence rate of pseudoprogresson in the p3 trial? It is over 30%. I am talking about DCVa-L alone case. With the addition of poly-iclc, the rate should be much higher. See the following figure? Pseudoprogression correlates with significant OS, which is obvious.
It's no surprise a fake Ph.D. has no seminal understanding about the publications. Not to mention to have vision.
Did JANX have an inclusion criteria that needed to be reworked since folks were not having opportunity for the treatment to work?; ). Trying to generalize about Phase 1 trials in this case is not justifiable. This Direct trial was deliberately hampered by first in man designation which included spacing of treatments that was not optimized, two different maturation stages and three different cell count dosing levels. Safety proved out and life changing results occurred because the science played out as expected. The results were exceptional for a Phase 1 considering all the limitations. Best wishes.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
