Replies to post #790747 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[exwannabe]

But several of your leaps don’t follow unless we accept unproven assumptions.
1) “No benefit in near-total resection” based on what statistic?
Saying “no benefit” because medians look similar is weak. Median OS is a blunt instrument in datasets with long-tail survivors. Two fixes are standard:
* Hazard ratio (adjusted) in the near-total stratum (with balance checks on age, KPS, MGMT, steroid use, time-to-treatment).
* Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) to capture area under the curve (long-tail effects) rather than a single percentile.
If the adjusted HR ˜ 1 and RMST difference ˜ 0 in near-total, fine then “no benefit” holds. But you haven’t shown that; you’ve asserted it from medians.

I did not base my statement on median, The HR was disclosed at the NYAS presentation. HR=1.01

2) Collapsing “substantial remaining disease” into one bucket (2 + 3) corrupts the comparison

Agreed 100%. But that is the analyais and data as presented given lack of patient level data.

6) What your current argument does and does not prove
Valid: Raw medians can be skewed if ECA has more partial/biopsy patients.
Not proven: That all observed benefit in the “residual-disease” DCVax cohort is explained by that skew. You haven’t shown an EoR-matched, time-aligned, covariate-balanced null effect.

Agreed. I am not attempting to "prove" that -L was not effective. Just noting concerns in the data that make it difficult to assert it has been proven it was effective.