Flipper
In that NIH article, Dr. Liau sounds confident in a future for DCVax, but the list of studies and their results include many failures, so it was difficult for me to have the same confidence.
Perhaps I automatically take an average of the results of the many clinicals described. But maybe that would be like watching that movie "Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines" in preparation for viewing Orville and Wilburs big test flight.
The problem is that the DCVax-L trial started quite a while ago, so the techniques are not necessarily newer than those in many of these trials. Doesn't mean the techniques/details aren't better, but they are not newer.
I suppose I could assume that many things are being tried that are inferior to prior trial techniques. That would make sense. Trying anything new would most often show worse results than the best out there to date. The failures would outnumber the successes.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
