I have heard of Imugene prioritising specific clinical trials, but have not heard them state they are actually say they have deprioritised any. Either way patients have been dosed in these said trials. I'm sure they still have data on them. In the CF33 Check VACC Trial there were initial signs of necrosis. What optimal biological dose was realised, and what were the patient outcomes? You are saying the trial is paused. Maybe so. But the shareholders who paid for the trial should still be made aware of the outcomes, as they should in what to me was the all important Imprinter Trial for PD1 Vaxx, in which I know patients were dosed, because Imugene announced it. Oh and btw why would they de-prioritise a trial in which Roche were supplying for what was a successful Phase 1 drug, meeting the huge unmet need that is lung cancer, for which they have several in place patents? Is that not worthy of shareholder discussion?
I'm not sure how long you have been associated with Imugene or the oncology space in the US for that matter, but I note you keep suggesting Imugene is here in the cycle and there and this company is at phase 1 or phase 3 (i.e., CG Oncology). That it's all years away for Imugene. In this day and age it has become somewhat irrelevant, though not to be dismissed, the Phase in the clinical trial cycle you are in. The reality is many products in this space are being acquired during Phase 1, or during Phase 2, without having realised Phase 2 or Phase 3 results. The statistics speak for themselves.
Imugene is sitting on one fast track designation, the prospect of more, in addition to 2 or perhaps 3 Registration Trials, and a plethora of advanced pre clinical data from a host of collaborations and combinations. I think there's value there, we don't need to wait til 2026 to realise it...
You don't sell products by discussing the product features, you sell it by creating solutions. Imugene has lacked investment due not to the fact it has an inferior product, but because it hasn't presented a solution for investors where they can visualise a potential return on their capital. The product, or science in their situation, is but one part of the equation. What is holding their shareprice back is not their science, but a lack of investment.
Oh and btw I don't even know why I'm responding to a poster who parades around with slang such as hahahahaa or lol. How old are you? Shouldn't you be in bed? Or over on Reddit or FB worthy of your stature. And who are you to displace or inadvertently unseat
@Mason14 by referring to him as a nutritionist with a supposed lack of scientific credentials. I'd be confident in saying you've never even met the guy, let alone be aware of his intellect. Go and walk a piñata and leave the rest of us to making worthwhile contributions if you please..
(20min delay)