Hi Mason, The reason the mice were immunized is so the human...

Hi Mason,

The reason the mice were immunized is so the human tumour grafts wouldn't be rejected. Human tissue is foreign to a mouse. If the tumour gets rejected, then there is no real point in using the mice model. Of course, humans wouldn't get immunized, why would they? Their cancers grow inside them and are not grafted in. Perhaps check if humans who received ANY implant are immunised or have heavy immunosuppressants...

Her-vaxx was tested initially in a patient population similar to the one where Herceptin was approved. In fairness, there should have been a comparison with Herceptin. However, the costs of that would have been tremendous, and IMU was tiny at the time. Enhertu 100% made it more difficult for Her-Vaxx to shine as Her-Vaxx had efficacy similar to Herceptin and much better safety. Still, Enhertu, given its Herceptin + a directed chemo payload, has better efficacy than Her-Vaxx, and given trial outcomes are still focused on OS and PFS, it's a clear winner. The game changed which is likely to happen, IMU have better therapies in the pipeline. I'm sure early holders would agree they'd prefer IMU-bought therapies to stay in the game rather than hold out on Her-Vaxx and potentially fail.

The Check-Vacc dosages you are quoting are also very small. We will find out this coming week whether CF33 at higher dosages is going to build on already solid results. Mind you RP2D hasn't been reached yet. So if IMU have done another data cut and results are looking better than before, happy days.

CF33 Mast results:

7 patients with gastrointestinal cancers who received CF33-hNIS alone during dose escalation achieved a disease control rate (CR, PR or SD) of 86% presented this week at the American Society of Clinical Oncology - Gastrointestinal Cancer Symposium (ASCO-GI)

2 partial responses in patients with melanoma (skin cancer)

In IV cohorts (17 patients), 53% of patients achieved stable disease as their best response.

Gastric Cancer Treatment Market is estimated to be US$ 16.1 billion by 2032 and is anticipated to register a CAGR of 13.3% over the forecast period – By PMI

How can you also say cancer therapies need to be cytotoxic agents? Having seen a few people go through chemo, I'd say patients would be much better off if there were an alternative to strong cytotoxic agents like chemo. Also, keep in mind the best-selling cancer therapies aren't cytotoxic agents, they are agents that cause the death (cytotoxicity) of cancer cells 'indirectly' by an immune response.

Also, regarding your comment about IT applications in the real world, it is low. Again, I feel you have a preference for general cytotoxic agents here, which kill fast-replicating cells wherever they are found, rather than a highly target therapy or one that benefits from replication like an OV. See here and here for a papers that discusses this. Also many cancers cant be cut out and aren't responders. Even skin cancer that has become large and growing rapidly cant be surgically removed. Or tumours close or growing near on vital organs/arteries, so yea IT is highly relevant IF you are talking about immunotherapies.

Anyway I'm off to dinner, not time to spell check or proof.

Cheers.