"My guess is that this will stunt GBM growth. My guess also, however, is that it will not prove curative, that it will just be temporizing/salvage."
The above is a key quote from the poster. I do not think that anyone is thinking of dcvax-l as a cure, although it may be for a small number of patients. So, the poster actually agrees that dcvax will extend life---That is enough! Could that poster provide a list of cancer drugs that are curative. One could point to some rare examples such as childhood leukemia. I strongly disagree with the posters contention that going after one target is the better strategy. He/she neglects another hallmark of cancer cells and that is evolution. The antigens change over time and selection favors antigens not recognized by an immune system targeting a single form of an antigen. I would argue that tumor regrowth should be followed by a second round of vaccine developed from the regrowth. Having said all this, a signal antigen approach could theoretically work, but out understanding of the immune system and how to mount a massive ramp-up of the immune system is just not there. So, if dcvax merely extends life, what a victory.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
