General Comments / Chat, page-11070

I saw a video yesterday with a panel of immunotherapy CEOs talking about their companies. One point in particular that caught my attention and I will try and paraphrase it based on my understanding:

Immunotherapy companies are developing therapies which use the immune system of patients to kill the cancer. It therefore would make sense that their therapies would work better on people who have healthier immune systems. Due to FDA regulations and ethical considerations, when developing new drugs you need to first show efficacy in patient populations that have tried and failed SOC. Many of these patients, having been through chemo, have depressed immune systems which make it difficult to achieve good results. It's frustrating for these companies as to gain approval they need to show improvement on the SOC (which is often chemo thats been used for years e.g. anthracyclines) in patient populations that are not ideal.

A couple of questions:
1. Is the above accurate?

2. From the May investor presentation "RC220 cardioprotection clinical program- An ‘all comers’ Bayesian dose escalation Phase 1a trial of RC220 in any solid tumour patient whereanthracycline use is indicated".
a) Does this mean the trial could accept anyone going onto chemo as a first-line treatment?
b) Would it be more likely that any patients recrutied would have failed lines of treatment previously?
c) Is there any expectation that bisantrene would be more effective in healthier patients?

3. Does the fact that bisantrene is trialled in combination with doxorubicin, even if initially with patients in poorer health, lead to the expectation that it would be adopted more quickly, even as a first-line treatment?

4. If bisantrene achieves success in increasing the current SOC of chemo, wouldn't this make it even more difficult for the immunotherapy companies?