Thank you for your post. Myself and others no doubt appreciate your entry to the forum.
That said with all due respect, you appear to fall into the common trap many investors fall into, when comparing Imugene (IMU-ASX) to other biotech stocks. Many tend to assume, albeit incorrectly, that biotech plays are a one size fits all scenario, when in reality each market segment is extremely different in size, patient numbers and therein market potential. It would be like me comparing Neuren (NEU), a company successful in treating Retts Syndrome, with Imugene's Azer cel technology, successful in treating blood borne cancers including non Hodgkins lymphoma. The former with the potential to treat closer to 10,000 cases each year, the latter 100,000 patients. Likewise comparing Repro, a successful drug in treating liver diseases, neurological disorders and gastrointestinal problems has nowhere near the potential reach of say Oncarlytics or Vaxinia, where significant tumour killing is already evident in solid tumour indications, (i.e, a market segment responsible for up to 90% of all cancers). When one considers close to 1 in 2 Europeans are expected to be diagnosed with cancer at some time in the future, I'm sure you get my point on the disconnect in market size.
As to your point on better luck next time, I would note Imugene have an exceptionally close working relationship with the worlds leading pharmaceutical regulatory authority, that being the FDA. They have recently achieved a faster than anticipated FDA IND for the revolutionary Oncarlytics platform in addition to further approvals for their allogenic therapy Azer cel, which promises to be the first best in class when treating relapse patients with blood cancers. Not to mention the FDA's acceptance of an expanded Vaxinia (MAST) Trial to include not only a combination with the world leading MAB Keytruda, but an expanded patient intake to boot. As a further point of difference I would be quite confident in saying Imugene are not entirely focussed, if at all, on TGA Approval. The US is the market where Imugene's long lasting and valuable patents and territorial rights have been sought and approved, in addition to the EU domiciles and Asia.
I feel somewhere along the line many posters fail to compare apples with apples when it comes to Imugene. I guess that is no doubt a common occurrence when one considers existing OV's, (or competitors to CF33) such as RP1, are ostensibly only capable of treating predominantly blood cancers, as are the existing CAR T competitors to Imugene's Azer Cel. Comparing Enhertu or Herceptin to Her Vaxx, or even Tercentriq to PD1 Vaxx in the lung cancer space is one thing. But if we are to further the debate it would be good if negative posters, (of which I am no way insinuating you are btw), to stopped comparing apples with oranges as it were. Let's liven up the debate by confirming which Oncolytic virus has proved successful in obtaining a 72% success rate when it comes to immune response rates with solid tumour patients, and all with limited or no toxicity (see Vaxinia (MAST) Trial, as but one example.
People are quick to cast dispersions when it comes to Imugene technology and trials, but slow to gather the necessary information to rival their mounting attack on the huge unmet need that is solid tumours within cancer patients.
DYOR Seek investment advice as and when required Opinions only
(20min delay)