"As an investor, the previous PRR trials are on so few patients...

"As an investor, the previous PRR trials are on so few patients that it would be absurd to extrapolate the results to a bigger population, except in a speculative, size-of-market sense.

The alternative interpretations of the phase II trial is that is was mere coincidence that those receving the vaccine outlived those receiving the placebo, or that Cvac is efficacious.

That's why there will be progressively larger patient populations in these subsequent trials to establish a reliable statistical basis for assessment - or to establish that there is not any such connection.

When I consider the likelyhood of one over the other, I obviously think it does work - simply because (from a non-medical perspective), it makes sense.

You boost and target the patients' immune systems to attack specific and well-identified and accepted components of the cancer and chances are that is what will happen, to some extent. It seems to me it will be the extent of it and not the fact of it which will be the issue."

misterS, you identify the essential issue, then apply an intuitive interpretation, despite earlier affirming it is "absurd" to do so.....

The medical literature is full of studies that show that intuitive analysis of disease and treatment is so often wrong. Science is the only arbiter.

There is so much conjecture and prediction in these threads, most of which is founded on little more than hope and intuition.

Keep a balanced view and never forget that Prima is still a speculative stock, and will be so until the science is settled and cVac has approval to go to market. Lose that balance at your peril.