Vaccines, page-3

Hi Veedub!

Yes - I have seen some similar articles, and I understand your concern. My view of Imugene is that competition from other new cancer treatments is now looking like a greater risk than the possible failure of the B cell or CF33 platforms to work. So far, at least, all indications are that both the B cell and the CF33 technology really do work pretty much exactly as predicted.

If that is the case, then the risk becomes - will someone else produce something as good, or better, before Imugene's tech can be commercialised?

The mRNA technology is definitely interesting and powerful, but cancer is more complicated than Covid. We will see.

Meanwhile, the competition issue works both ways. For example, if I was running Moderna of Pfizer, and looking at a huge investment in mRNA cancer vaccines, I would be seriously worried that CF33 might prove to be effective sooner than mRNA, with other major advantages over mRNA, and therefore beat me to the punch.

I would be noting that CF33 seems to be close to announcing interim results in Stage 1 trials with hints that - as well as excellent safety - they are also seeing real cancer killing effect.

I would be considering the fact that a combo trial with Keytruda is already in progress.

And then I would be considering a few key facts, that:

CF33 (and also B cell vaccines) will be be far cheaper than individualised mRNA cancer vaccines, where each patients has to have their own bespoke vaccine researched, formulated and then manufactured.

And CF33 (and B cell vaccines) will be much faster to administer too. ie. We already know with CAR-T's (which are individualised) that patients can die while they wait 4 - 8 weeks for their medication to be synthesised and manufactured. No such problem with CF33 or B cell vaccines, which will all be "off the shelf" products.

Not to mention the fact that CF33 seems likely to work across most, and maybe all, solid tumours - again as an "off the shelf" product. mRNA vaccines, however, will have to be developed and produced for each cancer type for each individual.... (How do you even scale that up?)

OnCARlytics is also a huge competition for mRNA vaccines. Because it is in combo with CAR-T it shares the CAR-T issue of cost and delay (the CAR-T's are expensive and take time to synthesise for each patient) - but CAR-Ts are proven and far advanced compared to mRNA cancer vaccines. Also - Imugene is partnered with people who are developing CAR-T's which are potentially superior to those currently on market - including an "off the shelf" model.

So there is huge competition to develop better treatment for Cancer, and mRNA tech is definitely part of that competition, but I do think IMU is looking like a very strong contender in the race.

The outcome remains uncertain - or Imugene would already be worth dollars per share, not cents - but that is also precisely why an investment in Imugene at this stage could be life changing. The risk is proportional to the potential reward.

Though in my (non-expert) view the market is now over estimating the risk that Imugene's tech will fail, and under estimating the potential reward. Competition is another matter - but Imugene looks positioned well, and they have multiple avenues for success.

Time alone will tell, as they say.

Cheers mate

Dave