Why IMU is a multi multi bagger, page-12804

I like the enthusiasm, but I suspect there are very scientific reasons for the way clinical trials are conducted. (i.e. not gut feel, hope, confidence, etc.)

Back when chemotherapies were going through clinical trials, they would run them against all cancer types to see what they would treat. Biotechs and BP moved to developing targeted therapies (i.e. monoclonal antibodies) and it became pointless running a clinical trial using an anti-HER2+ MAB against a cancer type that did not express HER2+ because it was known it would not be effective.

So, why is Vaxinia really being run against all cancer types? It is almost certainly not a case of not "playing safe", but rather because Vaxinia appears to be tumour agnostic (i.e. it is not targeted to a specific mutation of the tumour but somehow can recognise a cell is cancerous and invades it because of that); and the belief it is cancer agnostic is based on the research of testing it against the 80 different cancer cell lines Prof. Yuman Fong ran it against. So, that is the hypothesis they are testing, and it is also the only way to identify if there are any cancer types it will not treat. Additionally, if they do not test that broadly then they will almost certainly need to run additional trials which will only delay progression.

The clinical trial for CHECKvacc on the other hand was a trial designed before CF33 was licenced to Imugene. There was little funding for trials so, it was designed to be run against a specific cancer type for which there is no effective treatment to test if it had an immediate viable market. i.e. tested against its greatest need. Something similar has been done with HER-Vaxx because HER2+ gastric cancer is much harder to treat than HER2+ breast cancer, so they went after the harder to treat cancer as a means of progressing the drug to market faster because while trastuzumab (Herceptin) works wonders for breast cancer it is not so great for gastric cancers. So, rather than go head-to-head with the existing anti-HER2+ standard of care, they are placing the drug to market it into a market where trastuzumab is not an option and the standard of care is only chemotherapy.