Frank, I never said for you to trust me. And I really don't care what you think. Les took the time to talk with you and answer your stupid questions and you've had nothing but rude things to say about him and management ever since that time. You don't respect me and I can assure you, the feeling is returned.
If you would go into the other room and stay there, I think that would best.
Anyhow, back to my initial comment... I simply stated that UCLA will be working with NWBO on the trial. I said time would prove me right... NOT that I would prove me right to you Frank. In response to you, I said I had evidence... excellent evidence in fact.
But I will not share it with you Frank, and I never intended to share it with you.
Thanks Bob, for trusting me. Means a lot. :)
I really don't care that Frank doesn't. Jer... go back to what you're good at and read those SEC filings and think about their next cash raise. Where will it come from, how much will it be, and how soon will it come?
Again... as I said before, time will prove me right on this.
Yes I do have evidence. But since senior ostriches are not respected by you, I will not share my evidence with you. But it's some very lucky DD that I stumbled on. And I can assure you UCLA will be and wants very much to continue working with NWBO.
You are so wrong about UCLA not working with NWBO on that. But that's okay. Time will prove me right on that one. :)
One reason they are harder to treat is due to the Blood Brain Barrier (BBB). This serves as the brain's own security system and makes it very difficult for a drug to cross the brain's own security system. Of all the chemotherapies, I believe only Temador can. And DCVax-L can as well.
The latest Prins/Liau abstract out yesterday (July 7, 2016) in the JCI Journal entitled "PD-1 Blockade Enhances the Vaccination-Induced Response in Glioma" shows that *** DC vaccination allows for the infiltration of T Cells into the brain tumors *** while the PD-1 antibody blockade removes the shield the tumor activates to hide from the immune system.
All patients, regardless of whether they are control or treatment, upon eventing, are offered DCVax-L at crossover. This maintains the blind. Some patients will be just starting the vaccine while others will have already been on the vaccine as a treatment patient.
James, Linda Liau is the principal investigator for the entire trial. In that capacity, she may be able to see overall how all patients from all sites are performing both before crossover and after. She wouldn't know which patients were treatment and control... but she'd know if patients were living longer because most of them would end up in the cross over arm. There may be some patients in the control arm that opt not to enter the crossover ... and so their trial data can also be used to compare how they perform on simply standard of care.
observer, why not sell yourself? If you don't think others should buy at these prices, maybe you should sell, take your loss as a tax loss, and move on? Just think of the time you'll save not having to bash NWBO 24/7. :)
My Chinese fortune cookie that I opened yesterday read...
"Good news will be coming your way. It will be here any day!"
I laughed when I opened it. But I did save it for the fun of it. Hope that answers your question as it's as good as anyone else can predict.
don't know why the "#$%$" were put in my above post. Maybe my dove walked on my keyboard! Anyhow, it was supposed to read #$%$" master. :)
Hi trading... pseudo progressors are patients that seem to show early tumor progression but later on, it turns out it was a false positive, mainly due to swelling. So while the rapid progressors were excluded (as you noted), the pseudo progressors weren't (because they really didn't have "early tumor progression). They had additional imaging studies done to confirm or rule out which type they were. Now pseudo progressors often turn out to have the longest OS of allGBM patients.
And so flipper is adding to your post to state that despite the fact that these longer living patients were included in the Optune trial (in both the treatment and control arm), STILL 70% of the control arm patients had progressed by just 10 months.
And since DCVax-L's main arm has actually set up similar tests to keep both rapid and pseudo progressors out of the main arm, we might expect at least a similar or worse progression time for the control patients in the DCVax-L trial.
Anyhow, so speaks the grasshopper for the kung #$%$ master. He'll fix whatever I got wrong here.
"Patience is the calm acceptance that things can happen in a different order than the one you have in mind. " - David G. Allen
"Patience is power. Patience is not an absence of action; rather it is "timing". It waits on the right time to act, for the right principals, and in the right way." - Fulton J. Sheen
Well you'll eventually be proven wrong. I'm hoping soon. Then you'll have to acknowledge that fact.
I remember how Allan Butler's piece was supposed to air during that Stand Up to Cancer special, and then when they aired part of it, they actually cut it off about 2/3's of the way in. I am not a fan of MD Anderson. And I agree... MD Anderson's Buzdar set a lot of things in motion.
Woodford does not short stocks. He is patient and buys them, holds them or sells them. He does not short them. And he's not sold a dime of NWBO. You'd know because he'd have to file that he had.
So this entire thread is just another wasted post in a sea of wasted, useless posts that can be found by those shorting the stock on this board.
If your losses are that large, then when this stock turns around, your gains will be that much larger. Quit wearing blinders here. Spend some time researching the approval processes times and not so much listening to the shorts on this board make their nonsense repetitive non-stop arguments. You will do yourself a favor.
Have you taken the time to look and see how long an approval process for a drug can take? It's not just a matter of submitting an application, the FDA looking at it, and approving or disapproving it.
After assembling the entire BLA or NDA, the company submits the application. Then it takes the FDA 60 days to decide to either reject the application or decide to review it.
So say NWBO submitted in September 2015. Then sometime in November 2015, they were told yes (because if they were told no, we'd be done with this).
Without priority review, the review time is 10 months. With priority review, the process is 6 months. During this time, the FDA reviews both the professional labeling materials as well as the facilities where the drug will be manufactured as part of the approval process.
If those May 3 warrants had any meaning to them (I happen to think they did), then that meant they had hoped to have an answer to something by the beginning of May. If that's the case, that puts them at a 6 month process. November to April is 6 months. As an orphan drug, they are entitled to request a Priority Review. They submit that at the same time they submit the application... and they are granted or not granted that expedited process within the same two month period that the FDA decides whether to review or reject the application.
If there is an issue... say with manufacturing, then the FDA will request additional data. Notice that the May 2 PR stated they were submitting additional information in their ongoing dialog?
If you were truly long, you'd spend more time researching this type of stuff and looking for answers rather than moaning and groaning and crying about how the sky is falling. So I've determined that you're either short, or simply an idiot. And since you're able to put together a coherent post, I think you're a short.
boogie - I have the leaked April 2013 protocol. It specifically spells out a separate randomized pseudo progressor arm from the main arm. According to the protocol, it was supposed to number 48. Yet around September 2014, we saw a slide that put the number at 32... and that is the final number. Why increase the main arm patient number by 20% and then lessen the pseudo arm? It seems more logical to increase the pseudo numbers at the same time. The fact that they lessened it argues to me that they were seeing it was a cure by then and didn't want to add more patients into the trial where 1/3 of them would receive the placebo.
The EAP was set up AFTER the 32 pseudos were enrolled. The EAP takes all the rapid progressors as well as all the pseudos now. Previously, the pseudos were randomized into the trial. And the EAP trial is open-label... none of those patients ever entered the trial as they were disqualified for being either a rapid progressor, and the pseudos began enrollment there after their arm had filled at 32.
I'm not posting Jerry's info. I'm just saying I know who he is. It's just a part of my DD 'round here.
Frankly, he isn't really hiding himself so... one's gotta figure he doesn't really mind me knowing. However, if you think someone's shady or not on the up and up... and you can figure out who they are, it can help add to the puzzle you're piecing together.