I think a lot of people missed the finer details about MACK. Yes, MM-398 is an important drug but also important is the thesis MACK is testing (longer exposure to chemo drugs of days and not hours will make them significantly more effective, o the delivery technology which allows this to happen may be more valuable than the individual drug).
Additionally, "Erb3B", both MACK and AVEO had programs dedicated to that target. Both programs are now partnered with large pharma after "Phase I testing". We see pivotal phase 2 data this year. Everyone assumes MACK is waiting for MM-398 data to maybe do a financing, but base on large pharmas interest in Erb3B I think those assumptions are misguided. If data on Erb3B is positive, this is what will drive near term value for MACK. Always follow the money.
ok Erb3B is going to drive value, perhaps but it's not going to bring in the much needed cash for operations and neither will MM-398 for quite a while (and that's assuming an immediate approval that isn't guaranteed) as it takes time for sales to ramp up AND MONEY TO FUND THE SALES EFFORT. They will be doing a secondary (or borrowing large amount against future sales post approval). If they wait and do the secondary after approval, the share price will be higher, but 1) what if they don't get immediate approval for MM-398? Perhaps they get a approvable letter? This would be catastrophic. and 2) what's in it for the investors in the secondary at the higher price? They own't be happy. I think we see a secondary offering at ~$5 or so very soon. Good entry point and the company should do well going forward from there.
Investors price stocks prospectively (look at PCYC no revenue 6 billion market cap). With strong Erb3B results, this company will hardly be priced anywhere near where it is today (pivotal trial come this year). Sanofi would not be running all these different clinical trials if the target did not have potential. Again, they signed the license agreement after phase I. AVEO did the exact same thing with Biogen for the same target. This is not a coincidence that two large pharma companies sign license agreements for the same target after only phase I data.
Agreed. People seem to treat MM-398 as an afterthought, but should they? Abraxis - another nano-delivered chemo tech was bought for $2.5B+ by Celgene with approval in 1-2 cancer indications. Abraxane just showed 1.8 mos survival improvement in 1st line pancreatic cancer and will be approved on the basis of clearing that low bar. If 398 shows improvement of 1.5-2.0 mos in a sicker, heavily pre-treated 2nd line pancreatic population, there's a case that can be made that they should go head-to-head against Abraxane in the 1st line indication in another study. If they can get proof of concept on this chemo delivery platform, it would be a big deal.