Seeking Alpha

Situm

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Situm's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Northwest Bio: M.D. Anderson's Lead Role In DC Vax Direct Trial Is Encouraging [View article]
    This is a very interesting thread and I would like to thank Larry for having initiated it. One of the reasons I think NWBO's share price languishes is because of the simplicity of their product. They have not patented a synthetic protein or antigen; with DCVax-L they are "simply" taking the patient's lysate from the resected tumor and mixing it with the patient's DC--it is a process; and with DCVax-Direct they are pre-maturing the DC in vitro with the hope that once injected directly into the tumor the pre-matured DC will do a better given the immunosuppressive environment. Every article I have read and this was reiterated by Dr. George Cuokos in the article highlighting Penn's two step immunotherapy process with ovarian cancer, states that pulsing the DC with the assumed expressed antigen i.e, IMUC is not as effective as taking the antigen from the patient's actual tumor. I am a bit surprised that Dr. Cuokos as signed himself with IMUC being a member of their Scientific Advisory Council and not with NWBO. Similarly, with DCVax-Direct, NWBO has not made a proprietary discovery of a molecule but rather has patented the process for maturing the DC. I would be interested to hear Larry's take on this: the relative value assigned, rightly or wrongly, by the market to companies that have on the one hand have a proprietary right to a molecule, antibody, etc. and those that have a patent to a process. This has become all the more relevant given the supreme court's decision relating to patenting of human genes. Along these same lines, even if DCVax-Direct does not provide significant clinical results, the idea that these pre-matured DCs will become the cornerstone for all DC based immunotherapy in the future is interesting and certainly possible. Could NWBO have future licensing revenue in its future? It is all very interesting and made more so for a company with a 100 million dollar market cap.
    Jun 18 06:01 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Lightbridge: Check Out This $1.40 Stock Everybody Else Is Ignoring [View article]
    Sujan,

    Honestly, I did not even read your post as I know the story all too well. Do some more DD and you will find that LTBR never ever accomplishes what they say. The truth is this: about 8 years ago Mr. Grae said his thorium seed and blanket would be in test reactor outside of Moscow. Then he reiterated this about 5 years ago then dropped the whole idea of thorium seed and blanket. He moved on to all metal fuel technology. Now this technology is russian technology. It is not even clear who has the patent to this as it is based on russian nuclear sub technology. Moreover, they need permission from the DOD and perhaps Justice to even do anything. Regardless, they said about 2 years ago that this technology was going into the Advanced Test Reactor. Specifically for loop irradiation testing. Like everything else, this never happened. Then they said, they could not do loop testing so they would have to settle for capsule irradiation testing. And this too never transpired. Since making their incredulous statement that they made a transformational discovery about 3 years ago (they used the pop in the stock to do a secondary-- the funds are all gone by now) they have done essentially nothing. Before they can get NRC approval they still about a decade away. They have consulting business but that is worthless as they have not gotten a new client in about 5 years. Management has 0 credibility. The technology should it even be commercially viable is years away from approval. They have about 4 million in cash and nothing on the horizon. Yes, you might get a pop on some news of a worthless MOU but it will be sold into just like the hype from this article was sold into. LTBR is dead money. Not even insiders buy it down here.
    Dec 23 10:01 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Northwest Biotherapeutics: Moving DC Vax-L Rapidly Forward And Starting DC Vax Direct Trials [View article]
    Dear Adam,

    Why not focus on the partnerships that NWBO has formed and address those? If the previous poster is asking the right questions then let's supply the right answers and go from there. Now perhaps the company is completely lying about its partnerships but let's for now take their word for it. They formed a partnership with Fraunhofer whereby Fraunhofer has been certified to manufacture the vaccine for distribution inside Europe. Is this a partnership? Does this mean anything? NWBO got a 5.5 million dollar grant from SAB, Saxony Bank of Germany, one of the largest grants ever given. This grant consists of matching funds. Is this not a partnership? What meaning should we assign to this? One would think the Germans have better things to do then hand out money to small US biotech scams. NWBO has a MOU with Sara Cannon Research Center one of the largest oncology centers in the world as well as an arrangement with Kings College. Now I don't subscribe to either Kings College nor Sara Cannon the knowledge you portend to have (as I recall in a tweet you liked CLSN yet when it failed claimed the power of the Feuerestein Ratain Rule). So let's ask these questions: Why does the German government invest in NWBO, why the grant, why the partnerships with Fraunhofer and Kings College?
    May 8 09:31 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Northwest Bio: M.D. Anderson's Lead Role In DC Vax Direct Trial Is Encouraging [View article]
    Doc Logic,

    You state: The German PEI will look pretty foolish and cold hearted and so will the FDA if they are not ready to act very, very expeditiously in response to the best possible outcome of this trial.

    But what has the DCVax-Direct trial have to do with DCVax-Brain which is the trial taking place in Germany? With the latter the DCs are mixed with lysate from the resected brain tumor, in the former they are using a partially in vitro matured DC and directing it directly in the tumor which is inoperable. If the former does not work, it does not mean the latter does not work (in the latter the DC is essentially pulsed with the antigen while in the former the hope is the partially DC will pick up the antigen) and if the latter does not work, and the former does (not something one would expect) then it could mean that the problem lies not with the DC taking up the antigen but rather with communicating to the T cells in which case one would imagine a modification of the process wherein the lysate is pulsed with the patients partially matured DC (a combination of the two methods).
    Jun 16 01:12 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Northwest Biotherapeutics: Moving DC Vax-L Rapidly Forward And Starting DC Vax Direct Trials [View article]
    Here is what AF does not tell you and I know more about TRADING biotech than AF does (that is not to say I know more about the chances of trial success): The life of a biotech company reads like a book. Now it is true often the book is best categorized as a tragedy. The trial fails and either the company goes bk or reinvents itself. But in between the 1st and last chapter there are lots of subplots. The story of NWBO is really just beginning. The trial they started and stopped years ago due to a lack of capital -- some of it their fault some due to macro issues, is now proceeding. They have 45 clinical sites in the US and once Germany comes on line another 20 or so in Europe. They have established manufacturing facilities in Germany and the UK and the Phsse III trial should it be a success will likely get both FDA and European approval. Moreover, the results are only about a year away. Now you can listen to AF and how he "debunked" the phase I results but I don't see that-- nor does the FDA nor do their European counterparts. It appears only AF has done this. Furthermore, the phase i results were remarkably similar to those found in other similarly situated studies -- and this was pointed out nicely by Prop Think in article they did for SA regarding IMUC. Indeed when you consider the other trials and lump them together whether done by IMUC or NWBO private studies etc. the "P" value actually decreases suggesting even more so that these results were not random. Now we are not talking about an alternative therapy to an existing one. This is it for many GBM patients. So without being crude, the bar is set rather low. And, the safety profile, as pointed out by Mr. Smith is very benign. Looking at NWBO this way, ask yourself: How many companies are in the midst of a phase III trial for a blockbuster drug (estimated to be a billion in the US and a billion in Europe) that have a market cap under 100 million? How many have the insider ownership NWBO does? Does any of this guarantee success? Of course not. But you invest in these companies based on a risk/reward equation. If NWBO was 30 I would suggest that it was priced for perfection. Here at 3.50, I think it is actually priced for failure and nothing I have seen suggests the odds justify that.
    May 9 12:15 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Northwest Biotherapeutics: Moving DC Vax-L Rapidly Forward And Starting DC Vax Direct Trials [View article]
    Sorry but 1 last point and here I can hear "he doth protest too much". But whatever. I like to think that Dr. George Cuckos who is the director of the Ludwig Center in Lausanne Switzerland and one of the preeminent authorities on immunotherapy and professor of such at Penn knows more than all of us, even Adam. Now I suggested to Mr. Smith to read the Penn Paper published just a few months ago which uses an approach similar if not exactly like that employed by NWBO. In fact, the Chief Science Officer at NWBO, Dr Bosch (who is he really except former head of Molecular Biology at the Dutch National Institutes of Health -- piker! Where is his BA in political science?!) is a co-author of this study. Now this study will be essentially replicated in NWBO's new study their DCVax-Direct trial. But before I talk about the chances of their success, I would suggest an interested party read the Penn Study. I provided the link above. But remember, it is only the preeminent authority in the world not AF.
    May 8 10:04 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Northwest Biotherapeutics: Moving DC Vax-L Rapidly Forward And Starting DC Vax Direct Trials [View article]
    Just to add a few more points, Adam you acknowledge the stock is cheap and thus the tautology that inheres in your rule: If its cheap it's because investors have looked and passed. Your rule is nothing more than a tenet of the efficient market hypothesis and it is a tautology--- if it is cheap its because nobody wants it. Nobody wants it because it is cheap. But that is neither here nor there. The question is why you color your argument with one sided attacks and never mention the things like those I point out above. This suggests your motive is something other than sincere. How many small cap biotech companies do you know where the insiders own 40% of the shares? I
    May 8 09:41 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Northwest Biotherapeutics: Moving DC Vax-L Rapidly Forward And Starting DC Vax Direct Trials [View article]
    Dear Larry,
    Congratulations on the article. I have been long and recently very long NWBO and I found your article reassuring. I wholeheartedly agree that NWBO represents an asymmetric trade. I do not know of another small cap biotech company trading at less than a 100 million dollar market cap that is in the midst of a Phase III trial for a multi billion dollar drug (DCVax Brain), let alone one about to commence a trial as exciting as DCVax-Direct. Nonetheless, I have a series of questions.

    A) The pre-clinical studies that formed the basis for the FDA's broad indication for DCVax-Direct were not published. However, the UPenn did recently publish an article (the lead author was Dr. George Coukos -- one of the preeminent figures in immunotherapy) wherein they used a vaccine similar, if not indeed's NWBO's (see http://bit.ly/10Fm93b) to attack advanced ovarian cancer. If you read the abstract, the results were rather striking. Of the 6 patients enrolled, 2 had a partial response, 2 a complete response. Can you explain the connection between the article and the trial and NWBO? The article cites Dr. Marnix Bosch as one of the authors -- NWBO's Chief Science Officer.
    As you say, going from mice to men is difficult, but to the extent that the results of this trial can be replicated in the upcoming DCVax-Direct trial then I think the chances are better than slim.

    B)What has caused the delay in Germany? Many were expecting the German government to green light the Phase III trial there in the first quarter. Any insight?

    C)What significance can we derive from the FDA's decision to grant NWBO such a broad indication for DCVax-Direct? Can one assume the pre-clinical data were so persuasive that the FDA granted NWBO an almost unprecedented indication? Or would it be safer to conclude that given the gravity of the disease targeted the FDA was being "compassionate"? I for one have never seen such latitude in a phase i/ii trial.

    D)I would think that should the results from the phase i/ii trial be encouraging, interests in NWBO's Phase III prostate cancer trial might grow as it is based on the same technology. The company has stated it would like to partner with another company i.e., big pharma to get the trial started which is simply too large for them (almost 700 patients). In fact, would you say that favorable results in the DCVax-Direct trial, results we will know later this year (the endpoint is tumor regression and the company has stated that measurement of this can be had within weeks) would catapult NWBO into a new league pushing their market cap closer to that of CLDX (a billion dollars)?

    Thanks for the article and taking the time to address these questions.
    May 7 10:45 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Behind The Promotion Of Northwest Bio [View article]
    I have been a critic of NWBO and believe that DCDirect is nonsensical. It just seems to simple the idea that all we have to do is mature the DC in vitro, inject this matured DC in the tumor and voila we just solved the riddle. I have stated this since the beginning that this exercise might have some scholarship value but otherwise it is a waste of time and company resources. That said, I am not so sure the companies effort regarding the L trail are completely worthless. What revenues they will generate from "compassionate use" are also not particularly relevant as we should know within about 18 months whether the trial shows any clinical significance. So buying NWBO based on some nominal "compassionate use" revenues seems spurious. So assume the direct goes nowhere and assume that compassionate use revenues are nominal at best. That leaves you with the L trial and its progress. That in and of itself is probably worth the current share price IF there are not problems with that trail and therein lies the rub. The company does not update enrollment numbers and the Data Monitoring Committee has delayed now for an interminable duration a decision on efficacy. This latter point is the most salient one for a discriminating investor. Until such decision is had, I would avoid NWBO. In fact, part of me wonders whether the company is deflecting attention away from the L trial with the hyperbole surrounding the open label Direct Trial. Time will tell but I would advise caution and just wait on DMC. A negative ruling will set back NWBO below 2.50 imho. I also think the company is now once again broke and so a secondary should be forthcoming.
    Jul 7 11:10 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Public Apology To Adam Feuerstein On Northwest Biotherapeutics [View article]
    Doc,

    you say I want immediate gratification. Although I was long NWBO in January at 3.40 or so and then bailed, think of those who have been long for 5 years. Are the patient enough? In 5 years, the stock is down 80 percent. As I have stated over and over again, the last raise was done at the lowest prices in the company's history. Do you think hedge funds and institutions are not staffed with those much more knowledgeable than you and I? If they are, why have then in the words of AF looked at NWBO and passed?

    When institutions invest they do their due diligence including the "secrets" you mistakenly believe NWBO harbors. After the DD, all NWBO could get was 15 million dollars on rather onerous terms. Again the deal was done at the lowest price in the company's history, done with warrants and warrants on top of warrants. I also believe they conditioned the deal on NWBO getting a new accountant and converting their debt to Cognate into restricted shares.

    The point that really needs no more clarification is that under the stewardship of Ms. Powers shareholders, long and short term, have been decimated and I see little evidence this will reverse itself. That said, I wish you the best of luck and the company for that matter.
    Aug 30 03:22 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Public Apology To Adam Feuerstein On Northwest Biotherapeutics [View article]
    Bob, I think you are spot on. Here is the thing: had NWBO stayed focus on DCVax-Brain, the lead drug in their pipeline, I would be more optimistic. The CEO at one of the few investor conferences she has attended stated that they needed approximately 20 million to complete that trial. This statement was made prior to the 10 million dollar raise with Sabby. Thus, had NWBO just remained focus on Brain, along with the German 5.5 million dollar grant, they would have only needed another 5 million dollars, per the CEO's comments, to finish the trial. Instead, they undertook a huge endeavor-- DCVax-Direct. Moreover, the science supporting DCVax Direct is simply lacking. There is no scientific review-- not one peer reviewed sentence. In fact, truth be told direct intratumoral DC injection has never worked! Now I like the next guy appreciate testing the boundaries of science. But to undertake a large phase I/ii multiple site trial based on a few pre clinical studies with mice when as you say your credit is bad is akin to an unemployed person buying a McMansion with no coney down. I think it's reckless and a waste of what limited resources NWBO has. Now you may ask: then why did they do it? I am not sure. An affiliated party manufactures the vaccine for DCVax-Brain and Direct so maybe there is a conflict. But the recent mandate that Cognate, the manufacturer controlled by the CEO, take restricted stock in lieu of cash would suggest otherwise. Maybe the CEO is delusional or maybe just maybe she knows something. As you say, in a year all will be known but as for now the institutions funding this quarter by quarter are not rewarding NWBO for progress but on the contrary paying less as if to suggest the future is an ominous one and the closer it gets the less they are willing to pay.
    Aug 30 01:05 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Public Apology To Adam Feuerstein On Northwest Biotherapeutics [View article]
    If the dendritic cell technology is so widely recognized then why does the company have to give away the store each quarter? That was the purpose of the article.
    Aug 29 08:52 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Interest Figures, Insider Trading And Why Shorts Are Playing With Fire In These Patent Plays [View article]
    Those who short stocks risk losing everything as at least theoretically the stock can go to infinity. For this reason shorts are infamous for the due diligence theta put in. My invetor hero is Jim Chanos and almost every short case he outlines works. The point is: it's not the shorts who are playing with fire it's the longs. VRNG has been discussed ad nauseum. The case vetted and every angle pursued. If you think you know something more than the average nitwit on the yahoo message board talking of a RR of x% on y revenues I assure you this has been explored by every fund on the street equipped with patent attorneys, statisticians, CFAs and the like. It's not like the story is new. Price is truth and for now, for the last year, VRNG is worth 3 bucks. Never has so much been made of so little.
    Jun 29 06:04 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Reemergence Of Nuclear Power: A Case For Thorium [View article]
    Amit,
    It perfectly describes the LTBR you are writing about unfortunately you are unaware of the company you are describing about. With all due respect, too many SA authors read a company blurb or profile then spend an inordinate amount of time on the forest and fail to notice the limb of the tree they are precariously hanging from.
    Jun 23 09:55 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Reemergence Of Nuclear Power: A Case For Thorium [View article]
    Dear Amit,

    LTBR gave up on it's thorium plans years ago. Originally, when it was called Thorium Power it claimed to be advancing the ideas of Dr. Rakowski father of the US nuclear submarine program. Essentially, LTBR claimed this design, called the seed and blanket design, would be tested in a civilian nuclear reactor outside of Moscow. The claim was made in 2006, then 2008, then 2012. However, like all of LTBR's claims this came and went. Now like many suspect companies, LTBR changed focus, threw away this plans and announced before the national press club a "transformational discovery.". No longer would the company focus on thorium but a new fuel rod-- one that has nothing to do with Thorium but rather an all metal fuel rod. This announcement was subsequently met with a secondary done at 6 dollars and insider selling and well since ten the stock trades for under 20 million market cap. In summary, if the future is thorium then LTBR is NOTyour company. More importantly, if you want a sound financial future my advice is to run from LTBR.
    Jun 23 08:51 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
51 Comments
79 Likes