I think this is the most accurate assessment on the topic of Big Pharma involvement. A great post. Big Pharma becomes involved at any stage in a therapies development, from pre-clinical to post Phase 3.
Statistics highlight the fact BP are involved from start to finish in either out licensing deals or take overs of smaller biotechs and their therapies, depending on a number of factors. These factors often include, but are not limited to:
1. Their own oncology pipelines, presence in the market and strategic direction. Does the medicine compliment their existing portfolio?
2. Their own cashflow and cash reserves
3. Their shareholder concerns and support
4. The veracity of the therapy being sought i.e., taking into consideration the need for the treatment, the market size it is treating, the drugs safety profile, efficacy and future application i.e., combinations
5. The FDA's stance on the clinical trials being performed by the target i.e,, is the FDA supportive? Is a fast track designation in place? Has the drug been previously rejected?
6. The competition within the market space including existing approvals in similar indications, e'g.,, bowel cancer Jemperli, or lung cancer Tercentriq, blood cancer T - Vec. When are the patents for the existing competition expiring?
7. How meaningful are the clinical trials being conducted? The number of participants? The stage of cancer being assessed? The indications being examined? The expertise of those designing and monitoring therein supervising the clinical trials? Who are the industry peers reviewing the trial data?
8. What is the financial circumstances of the company who owns the existing data? Are they cash flow positive, revenue neutral of pre revenue? Their cash reserves? Their board and share ownership? Regulatory constraints?
9. What territorial rights
if any are attached to the therapy?
10. Who owns the actual therapy? Are there any existing licences or contractual agreements perhaps obstacles in play?
In short there are a myriad of issues let alone permutations and combinations to be taken into consideration when analysing the timing and placement of prospective Big Pharma offers for meaningful data or indeed potential takeover offers. More often than not such deals are dependant not upon the treatment being sought, but the strategic direction of the company seeking to acquire them.
Leslie Chong - Imugene CEO and Managing Director I was reading another good post over on the multi bagger thread this morning discussing the positive vibes exuded by LC of late, and therein the prospects surrounding a potential acquisition or out licensing of Imugene product by BP. I have not been totally across her recent interviews other than the
Emerging interview in which I agree, she was assertive, confident and self assured. My take on the matter is that she has been preparing her said "meaningful data" for some time now, amid a high degree of frustration. Covid, macroeconomic turmoil, capital constraints and raises, competitor developments (i.e., Enhertu) and internal staff changes have all proven somewhat of a distraction to her end goal, that being to deliver immunotherapies that go deep toward meeting the huge unmet needs present in the existing oncology market place. Now,
and perhaps only now, are the pieces of the Imugene puzzle coming together, with the recent acquisition of Azer cel complimenting her combined CF33 Oncarlytics strategy. With all of Imugene's key products now,
and I say finally now, in the clinic, she can sit back and contemplate the road ahead with a degree of surety, if not self satisfaction in not only her achievements, but the achievements of the company she is charged with the responsibility of steering around the globe. Many including myself have been critical of her presentations at times, however as I think it was
@tb said, she has always driven her media and presentations toward Big Pharma. They themselves understand the data, and do to need the "dumbed down version" many lay people are searching for.
On a corporate level I do think Imugene is now as close to a commercial proposal from Big Pharma as they have ever been. Contrary to popular belief I cannot see BP sitting back and waiting to pull the trigger if the current Vaxinia thereafter Oncarlytic results resemble anything close to what we visualised pre clinically. The stakes are simply too high. If the safety profile for these drugs remains stable and their continues to be positive signs of efficacy, its game on IMO. In 2024 Oncolytic viruses are under close scrutiny as a potential new source of revenue for a BP in search of answers to their existing dwindling runways, regulatory hurdles and shareholder demands.
On a personal level I wish LC all the best, no matter the outcome of Imugene's current situation. I have spoken with her often over the years, on a business and personal level, and have always found her to be compassionate, interesting, insightful and at times extreme fun to be with. As an individual needing to combine family with work at such a high level it is at times humbling to know the time she puts into her shareholders, their needs and everyday concerns. But what I not sure many of her shareholders comprehend is the extensive knowledge she possesses on the biotech, in particular oncology market in general. LC has extensive knowledge on the companies in this space, the progressive treatments they have in play and the personnel involved, including those at the pointy end making the big decisions for BP. If LC hasn't met them in person, rest assured she knows of them.
I would be confident in saying the commercial decisions arrived at in the ensuing months if not years have been planned for some time now, over many many years of deliberation, reflection and at times heartache. I for one wait with bated breath at the outcome of these financial decisions, but am equally keen to sit back and watch as the brilliant science from YF, SP, PK and all involved, evolves.
Enjoy your Sunday, wherever it takes you. Best of luck to all following the story.
DYOR Seek investment advice as and when required Opinions only
(20min delay)
