So many great posts today. Mr K, davybaby outlander supertramp luckywinson and basically everyone who is jumping for joy, as I am. There is not much to add to what has already been posted other than to say things can only get better, as we realise the results of Vaxinia’s treatment at higher dosage rates.
From a management perspective the company’s decision to prioritise Vaxinia and oncarlytics moving forward is a sound one.
@WellsEicke you asked Hi Ben,
So if BP make their move on Vaxinia, do they go now or waiting until Ph. 2 is available? Cheers.- WE.
My answer would be that Imugene pursue a phase 2 registrational trial forthwith toward the end of 2024, either as a significant breakthrough therapy through the FDA’s fast track program, or via the orphan drug status route, depending on which cancer indication(s) are most successfully treated at higher doses. It does look a fete a comple given todays results that FDA Fast Track approval shall be granted, particularly given Imugene’s previously sound working relationship with the US regulatory authority, not to forget Biden’s Moonshot initiatives.
@Stungun you asked of me As a thought I wonder how the results would be if it were trialed on patients who are less severe with disease than the ones in the current trial.
I can only suggest given my research that oncolytic immunotherapies and immunotherapies collectively have had higher initial success rates in treating those suffering from earlier stage as opposed to advanced levels of cancer, due to the apparent underlying strength of the immune system in those diagnosed with the disease earlier. Those who have undergone extensive treatment procedures often suffer from immune suppression and are therefore less likely to exhibit positive responses to immunotherapy treatment. But the jury is still out when it comes to Vaxinia. Either way we may see some further partial or complete responses from those who have experienced disease stabilisation in the current Vaxinia MAST trial. Potentially over time Vaxinia may start to take hold, eradicating their cancerous cells, leaving the healthy ones alone, to hopefully fight off the weakened cancer cells as time goes by.
@Steini I have read your post wherein you quoted I think you, I and many others here now expect the 2 directors Eckstein and Drapkin as well as Monil Shah to live up to our expectations to take action and deliver on the funding / deal front. They were introduced to us as CR-experts with huge connections to the financial world. So far we just have seen Bell Potter in action, no European money and apart of the 30c-CR with an US fund involved, no $$$$ from the other side of the world.
Hopper quietly let the planned NASDAQ-Listing for RAD fade away but if a NASDAQ-Listing for IMU was / is on the card then now is the time. It looks the market could slowly turn back to growth stocks and potential instead just income stocks.
I echo your sentiments here and would ask fellow posters who question the IMU valuation, and indeed the notion of a NASDAQ listing to take a look at Replimune, REPL(NASDAQ) USD 14.20 +0.56 (+4.11%), a Nasdaq listed stock worth 4 to 5 times Imugene’s current valuation. Unlike Imugene, Replimune is ostensibly a one trick pony with their RP1 oncolytic immunotherapy (a variant of the herpes simplex virus), havinga 34.8 percent success rate in those with Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (CSCC) and other skin cancers, in what were in the main small trial samples. RP1 operates in a relatively crowded space with key competitors include FDA-approved treatments like cemiplimab (Libtayo) by Sanofi (SNY) and Regeneron (REGN), Merck's (MRK) pembrolizumab, and an investigational therapy, cosibelimab, developed by Checkpoint (CKPT), which showed a notable ORR in its trials. That said market opportunity for RP1 is significant given the high susceptibility of organ transplant recipients to skin cancer, (see Seeking Alpha for more).
But despite Replimunes heavy reliance on RP1 what is of interest to me is theinvestor breakdown, as noted by Seeking Alpha over the weekend, Institutional ownership is high at 92.74%, with new positions (1,767,272 shares) outweighing sold-out positions (1,105,008 shares), showing continued institutional interest. Notable institutions include Price T Rowe Associates with a 4.32% increase in shares held and Redmile Group, which heightened its stake by 15.964%. Insider trades over the past three and twelve months exhibit net positive activity with 57,672 and 381,306 more shares purchased than sold, respectively, suggesting insider confidence in the company's future.
Now clearly the well funded NASDAQ institutional investors have not only a penchant for oncolytic immunotherapies, they recognise the promise exhibited by drugs illustrating any sign of efficacy in treating cancer, no matter how small the sample or market segment. Conversely down here in Hicksville ASX land we’d be lucky to have 50% of insto’s holding on the IMU books. But anyway, that’s for another day, as discussed previously Monil and the team have a lot of work to do. They are clearly light years behind their scientific counterparts in terms of results.
That said, and most importantly, back to a sensational day. YF has the runs on the board now.
In conclusion YF suggested to me on his last visit he was prepared to keep dealing up the therapeutic window. Its obviously that important for the drugs efficacy and economic viability, not to forget the importance to cancer treatment as we know it, let alone the future of mankind. Is 10 parts to the 10 out of the question? Let’s wait and see.
DYOR Seek investment advice as and when requires Opinions only
(20min delay)
