I agree. The technical things seem to be going OK. I think this company is a take over candidate. Merck or Lilly at the top of the list.
Due to the Canada disaster the oil surplus is now gone. Those 1200 drilled but not fracked wells will now be fracked ASAP. SSE will be getting crews ready tomorrow.
Did IMMU get any hearing to present their side of the story or did ASCO act based on data that a third party sent them ? Mrs. Sullivan has issued a statement saying the paper to be presented did contain new data. I have followed ASCO for a number of years and I have never heard of a case like this.
it should work in combination with Opdivo and Keytruda. Both these drugs are doing great but in all their trials there is always a group of patients whose immune system doesn't respond. CDX-301 added to these drugs might help some of the non responders.
I hope IMMU gives a good explanation of what happened at ASCO. Also, somebody please ask why they don't screen patients for the presence of Trop 2 before treatment. Picking patients who overexpress the receptor greatly improves the % of responders.
Good- If IMMU can prove the ASCO data was from May and that it was from a separate group of patients then the law suits won't be a problem. The bad- they need a partner for 132 because phase 3 trials are very expensive and they don't have a lot of money. Also, the best partner would be a big pharma that has a PD-1 inhibitor because all cancer treatment is moving to a chemo- drug plus a PD-1 inhibitor.
The selling my not be as simple as it looks. If some if the insiders held stock on margin with the thought that the good TNBC results would increase the price then the surprise withdrawal of the ASCO paper would have resulted in some margin calls.
PD-1 inhibitors ( Merck, BMY) work best when some of the cancer cells are killed off by some other means and the pieces of cancer protein are picked up by APC cells and used to train the T-cells to attack the cancer. X-Rays are commonly used for this purpose in lung cancer
Slides from two different presentations are available on the IMMU web site. One set is from the PEGS meeting in Boston on April 25, 2016 and the other set is from the Jefferies Conference in June 2016 (post ASCO). The crux of the results are presented in a format known as Waterfall diagrams in which each patient has a bar that shows their change from a baseline value. The Jefferies Waterfall is chart # 9 and dated May 2016 and the PEGS Waterfall (# 18) is dated DEC. 2015. The data are similar but not identical. For example, there are 15 patients with progressive disease (5 shown + 10 not shown) whereas the PEGS Waterfall has a total of 11 with PD. IMMU has stated that the ASCO data was from May 2016 and was different patients or updated from the April presentation.