If you look at IMU's Her-Vaxx phase 1 study, the announcement...

If you look at IMU's Her-Vaxx phase 1 study, the announcement they made (7th Feb 2018) on the first cohort had no data attached to it. It was not presented anywhere. It was a simple statement there was a strong antibody response, but no mention of the type of response (if any) and no data at all to share with shareholders.

In fact IMU only provided the topline results after the phase 1 study completed... which was in December 2018 after 14 patients were recruited overall. So for the majority of the trial.. all shareholders got were broad statements that the treatment was working.. no data whatsoever. But in the end, they had 1 complete response, 5 partial responses, 3 stable disease and 1 with disease progression.

You may be wondering why Her-Vaxx recruited so quickly... well in short they had 8 sites going at the same time (we currently have 1, but will add more shortly), as it is very easy to set up a clinic to inject a 'vaccine'. CAR-T clinical recruitment is a lot harder to come by, which is why there is such a large difference in trial times. G

But if we look at what CHM are doing and what IMU did... its night and day. CHM's first cohort update will be presented at the SNO as well as a separate presentation on CLTX's mechanism of action.

What CHM are doing is very different to IMU when they were at a similar stage... CHM appears to be very open with data in its trial... and maybe it is just me, but if there isn't something worthwhile mentioning.. why would you give two presentations about it? Why would the oncology industry even bother giving two slots to a newbie like CHM, an ASX listed company with a A$100m market cap... what exactly does CHM have in CLTX that warrants two slots at a renowned US oncology conference, which will be attended by leaders and decision makers in the field?

It is interesting to note that IMU's phase 1 trial led to a phase 2 trial which was supposed to enroll 68 patients as a 'proof of concept' study as opposed to a registrational study. So IMU is basically starting its registrational studies shortly, with a reasonable improvement on the standard of care. And they are at A$2.4bn market cap, even after the recent sell-off.

So CHM is at best going to finish the phase 1 study in Sep22, and worst case Sep23.. I suspect when exactly will largely depend on how many sites they get up and running and when. I honestly don't think it will take until Sep23, and that it is an ultra conservative timeframe... I'm still leaning toward end of 2022 / early 2023. But where it ends up will depend when the new sites are announced.. if we get some this year or early next... we'll have a strong chance of hitting end of 2022... if we don't hear anything until mid next year.. ok Sep2023 most likely. Whatever the date, once CHM complete their phase 1 study... whether it be Sep22 or Sep23, CHM will essentially be at the same spot IMU is now... that is about to being their registrational study. A$100m market cap vs A$2.4bn market cap.

Which is why each cohort read-out is so important.. what we can expect is that CLTX is going to show a dose dependent response.. that is, the higher the dose.. the better the response. Couple that with the fact they are learning so much about CLTX and how it actually works, the patients recruited later in the trial will likely be much more likely to show a strong/complete response. If there is a response at the lowest dose for CLTX, it is fair to assume that the response will improve as the doses are higher.. and we know that the market likes to look forward.. so give them a baseline/marker backed by data.. and IMO the market will in time fill that gap between A$100m and A$2.4bn.