Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Celsion Corp. Message Board

  • cameron12x cameron12x Feb 6, 2013 4:52 PM Flag

    Individuals without Treatment did Better?

    Is it true that individuals without treatment (the control arm) actually did better than patients who followed the ThermoDox regimen in the P3 trial?

    I've seen people mention this in various threads and I would like to know whether this statement is true. If thought to be true, where is the source of the information? A press release?

    Thanks and GLTA!

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Yes, the control arm did better.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • yes
      stockstoshort kept pointing out 380 bad events happening too fast

      warned everyone disappointing results coming by 01.31.2013 and to join shorting clsn
      nobody believed

      this is not about to become miracle turnaround story

      heres whats coming in 2013, not by specific order
      massive fundraisers
      confirmation of awful results and test patients died
      eventual delisting
      bulleting board pink sheets penny stock
      ceo departure
      class action lawsuits

      hope this helps you make informed decision
      just saying

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • No, I believe that they stated that the control arm performed better than expected (according to the initial data results), not that it beat Tdox. They did say that the performance from a "top line" was "not even close". I believe that is still accurate given the TOP LEVEL data... If you are genuinely interested continue to stay close to this. My belief is that there is something wrong with the data from top line. As they begin to dive deeper and examine the data, there will be more news. It's unfrotunate that they didn't have data other than the basic unblinded top-line results on 1/31... but that's all they expected to need.

      I am not refering to the secondary end point (overall survival). I am refering to further information from the information that they curerntly have from primary end-point.

      I believe there is a reason that MT stated clearly that they are looking at the "population subgroups" There is a reason they believe this will tell them something.

      Sentiment: Hold

      • 2 Replies to jimbobtooth
      • I think to add, they were looking at a 33% level and as you stated, they said no where that. So it could have still been a few to 10% or some amount and what is still not determined is the OS due to what ever level it was. That being said, I have pointed out a number of times that any improvement in OS from any improvement level even if far less than the 33% could be grounds for the FDA to still consider approval. All speculation and perhaps a long shot, but something to consider.

      • Look, Still think the concept is good, but poorly executed. SOmething went amiss in the testing. LOst more than a bundle, do not care but will buy soon may be 10k shares and will increase if seeing a up trend and more positive info. Did not pay attention to chart enough and failed to notice the 4 signs of seeking alpha, cowen cancel, release last day, circuit breaker trigger 3 days before, less than 300M market cap

 
CLSN
1.470.00(0.00%)12:08 PMEDT