No worries, it is good to question the comparison as the mistake...

No worries, it is good to question the comparison as the mistake could easily have been mine. The study protocols can be quite intricate so it is easily done.

Agree that the path of improvement is key. However, my understanding is the last chemo treatment was day 56 so perhaps improvement we are seeing at what I think is day 98 is still the effect of chemo. I don't know if these timelines are correct for sure or if this scenario is likely.

In the Herceptin + chemo v chemo alone trial, median OS was 13.8 v 11.1 but as Axel Hoos explains in the below video, even median OS is not necessarily a good measure for evaluating immunotherapy as there may be a significant minority of patients who experience longterm benefit.

Whilst the response data we have looks like what we might expect if the treatment is working as desired, it really doesn't tell us much hence the lack of share price reaction. Now, if we get news every 84 days of continuing improvement in the data as the final patient progresses then it becomes increasingly likely that HER-vaxx works. Even no improvement in response rates but continued survival would be significant over time.

Do we know how many patients actually died to date?

First patient dosing was at the end of August in 2017 so that is more than 18 months ago. Are they still alive? How many HER-vaxx boosters has each patient had to date? Some of them could have had a few of these by now.

My understanding (although I'm not certain) is that the data we have is for all patients as at day 56 and again at day 98. If this is correct then except for the last patient, Imugene would know the status of patients beyond these periods and in some cases significantly beyond. So what has become of them? Have they continued to improve?