CVM Cel-Sci Corp

$CVM Sushi, Sushi, Sushi........you had me at hello......you've already won.....I am destroyed. I had $1M in CVM stock back in its heydey....I have waaaaayyy less now. Take your victory lap, please....you were right, I was wrong. You started the killcvmshorts website and I believed in you, then you thought it would be better to trash a company that you know damn well was trying to do some good. I'm sure you made some money trashing this stock....Congrats!!!...Sleep like a baby at night. I believe...not because I expect to make a dime...(although i will point out to the newbees that the sp has doubled in the last 3 mos and SA is absolutely going to approve the drug). I'm still here not for financial gain. The market, Nvidia, and other AI stocks sucked up all the O2 in the room. I'm here because this freaking drug is going to get approved and it's going to save lives. Mock me, call me a moron. I don't care. I've lost 10s of thousands, but I will never give up on this drug. NEO

$CVM I'm a surgeon who does the significant amount of tumor and cancer surgeries and I'm bullish on CVM, why? Since the drug is designed to boost and upregulate the immune system, then it's no wonder that it didn't work well in patients undergoing traditional immune suppressing chemotherapy. The results would reflect this as the patients who did not receive chemotherapy had significantly better results often with significant shrinkage and in some cases complete resolution. Therefore that FDA trial was flawed, in that they're using a drug designed to ramp up a well functioning immune system in patience with severe immune suppression. I suspect this will be used as a first line treatment, prior to chemotherapy for many tumors in an off-label fashion since this is a common treatment method with many drugs. The data has shown that the drug is safe, and that it does work in the correct circumstances. Many drugs won't work well if given improperly or in the wrong conditions.

$CVM The year is 2030. The first dinosaur was cloned and brought back. Flying cars are now mass produced. First contact with aleins are made public. News of Cvm approval in Saudi Arabia is expected any day....

$CVM $SLS The academia and institutions were always sceptical about Multikine despite cheerful massages from the management. It is very different from GPS where the KOLs barely contain their excitement and request indefinite treatment.

$CVM what a bullshit post👇what a bullshit post, of course with all due respect. you want to tell me 25% better survival in node negative (N-0) is a failure! go tell this to cancer patients. given a chance of 75% survival is way much better than 47%... even in none N0 at 12% better chance you would take that if youre ill wouldnt you! And the fda thinks same this way! the drug will get accelerated approval without having to wait for confirmatory result.

$CVM let’s pick up where we left off next week. Hopefully with some Saudi news! Cheers to all the bulls and bears. Even you BioG 🍻

$CVM BULLISH SHMITTHAPPEN You have been standing in front of the fan so long you can see anything. It doesn’t matter who all doesn’t accept the mathematical statistics of lives saved by those taking Multikine. It happened. No matter who rejects it we want to see it happen again. Get the Schmitt out your eyes. GOOD LUCK BULLS 💎💎💎💎💎 ✋🤚 💎💎💎💎💎

$CVM quietly building something here. Each pullback is bottoming out higher than the last, a staircase pattern the real traders watch closely. That bounce wasn't just noise, there's real buying underneath it. Worth keeping on the radar. 💎

$CVM BULLLISH SEEMS SCHMITT was standing directly in front of the fan and it happened. GOOD LUCK BULLS

$CVM If they were pumping for a raise, they certainly didn't time it very well. As usual the CEO and ThinkEquity are certainly not up to the job. Makes for good trading though. We all know they're going to do a raise very very soon (even as one poster here is constantly faking that the documents already have been filed- geez why bother dude, who are you trying to convince?). My bet is right after the conference at the end of the month on what little they can pump then.

$CVM Your posts this AM appear to be a short ploy. Otherwise, why say "It's now public" without any supporting evidence? Your credibility is looking weak... 🫩

$CVM you’re a loser and your son is gay. You failed as a man. No wonder you’re always in this board putting people down. Loser 🤣🤣

$CVM takeaway on original trial: The effect size is unusually large. In that selected population, the original Phase 3 result was roughly 73% alive at five years versus 45% control, HR ≈ 0.35, with p≈0.0015. That isn't a marginal subgroup signal. If it reproduces prospectively, it would be clinically substantial

$CVM - About 2x the normal daily volume already before noon this morning. No real news though - so no sign of what is driving it today. It's good to get a green day once in a while - so I won't complain.

$CVM CEL-SCI’s Latest PR: More Promotional Spin, Same Failed Phase 3 Trial Let’s dissect today’s press release because the difference between what CEL-SCI is promoting and what it has actually demonstrated is enormous. 1. The 73.4% vs. 45% survival figures are NOT new. CEL-SCI continues recycling favorable survival statistics from a selected subgroup of its original Phase 3 trial. The company highlights a 66% reduction in the risk of death (HR 0.34) as though this represents a new clinical breakthrough. It doesn’t. These are analyses of existing patients from a trial that failed to meet its primary endpoint in the overall study population. No amount of repetition changes that fundamental fact. 2. The subgroup analysis is the elephant in the room. The headline survival figures involve just 114 patients selected from a much larger trial. Why does that matter? Because a favorable result in a selected subgroup does not carry the same evidentiary weight as a successful, prospectively defined primary endpoint. Subgroup analyses can generate hypotheses. They can identify potentially promising patient populations. But they can also exaggerate treatment effects, particularly when multiple analyses are conducted. The company emphasizes the most favorable numbers while investors are left to determine how much confidence those numbers actually deserve. 3. The 38% vs. 13% downstaging result is not proof of a survival benefit. Today’s release also highlights a statistically significant difference in presurgical downstaging, reporting p=0.003. Sounds impressive, right? But downstaging is not the same as demonstrating improved overall survival. It’s an intermediate clinical measure, and its significance depends on how it was defined, assessed, and analyzed. A statistically significant secondary or exploratory finding does not retroactively rescue a failed primary endpoint. 4. The 66% reduction in mortality risk is being presented without sufficient context. A hazard ratio of 0.34 sounds extraordinary. But where is the emphasis on the confidence intervals, the subgroup selection methodology, the number of events, and the statistical limitations associated with these analyses? Those details are essential to evaluating the reliability of the result. A hazard ratio derived from a selected subgroup cannot simply be treated as definitive proof that a drug reduces mortality by 66% across its intended treatment population. 5. The Rome presentation is not independent validation. CEL-SCI is using a conference presentation to generate another promotional headline. Presenting an analysis at a medical conference does not establish that the results have been independently replicated, accepted by regulators, or confirmed in another clinical trial. A conference podium is not an FDA approval. A presentation is not a successful confirmatory study. The venue doesn’t strengthen the underlying evidence. 6. What’s conspicuously absent from today’s announcement? No new randomized clinical trial results. No independent replication of the survival findings. No regulatory approval. No new definitive evidence resolving the original Phase 3 failure. No financing announcement or funded strategic partnership. Instead, shareholders receive another carefully constructed narrative built around favorable analyses of historical data. THE BOTTOM LINE CEL-SCI seems remarkably skilled at converting the same clinical dataset into an endless supply of optimistic press releases. The company wants investors focused on impressive percentages, dramatic hazard ratios, and prestigious-sounding presentations. But the fundamental scientific question remains unanswered: Can Multikine’s reported benefit in this selected population be reliably reproduced? Until that happens, these numbers remain promising but unconfirmed subgroup findings—not definitive evidence of efficacy. You cannot press-release your way to clinical success. You cannot market a failed primary endpoint into a positive one. And you cannot substitute promotional repetition for independent validation. At some point, investors need to stop counting press releases and start demanding genuinely new evidence.

$CVM I am sure i be asking the same questions next year and Geert will be diluting at .2 😂

$CVM Day 433 since the news of approval in as little as 60 days. I think they are on pace for their timeline. Good work Geert and the rest of the CVM staff.

$CVM — Another Conference, Another Cash Raise Coming? Let’s stop pretending CEL-SCI’s conference circuit represents meaningful progress. Today’s ThinkEquity conference looks like another opportunity to promote the same tired story to potential investors. Meanwhile, the next dilutive cash raise appears increasingly likely. The company’s own filings acknowledge substantial financing needs and going-concern uncertainty. And Rome? Expect another presentation recycling Multikine data, dressed up as a breakthrough. My prediction: nothing materially changes. No approval. No commercialization. No meaningful catalyst. The Saudi SFDA story has been promoted for well over a year, yet shareholders are still waiting for a publicly announced regulatory breakthrough. Presentations don’t pay bills. Press releases don’t equal approvals. And shareholders can’t survive indefinitely on promises and dilution. My prediction: more hype, more fundraising, more dilution,

$CVM Maybe its time find about Sushi-Schmitt's twisted sick obsession with Elf on a Shelf. Ask him. I'm sure he'd love to send along some of his favorite pics. Maybe they'll turn up somewhere else. Cheers Kelley Dad!

$CVM institutional ownership has increased by 134%. Vanguard ownership has gone from 250,000 to 543,000 shares since May. Time to load up.