I'm just quietly watching. Hard to start a conversation with nobody. I held some shares at 9 or so but averaged down so I'm looking pretty. I still think this is a winner in the next 6 mths.
I am disappointed. I didn't expect it to pull back almost to where it started. Also, the daily trading pattern is nasty. Green all day and then down at the close. It's as if someone is saying, 'we have all of the control, and this will keep going down." I have my fingers crossed for some definitive news that will break it out of this rut under $1. It doesn't belong here.
Mortdove, unfortunately I think the main issue is a lack of funding, which is stemming from mediocre trial results. Their best bet is the HIV trials network, but who know when that'll will pan out, if it does at all. I hope GOVX turns it around.
I most definitely agree. However, their profits are vanishing and they are starting to think about covering. I still think the hardest part of investing is determining when to get out (short or long). Let them feel some agony!
I thought about my question #3 and want to address quickly. If you treat with INO's vaccines before chemotherapy/radiation, it makes no sense because you'll wipe out the immune response as a result of the chemo/rad's. Immunizing after chemo/rad's will allow the immune system to ramp up again and as someone stated, this will sort of be a preventative vaccine (will prevent relapse). As an aside, at this juncture (from a regulatory point of view) it's easier to add to standard of care. Let's all hope this is fruitful!
I have always been curious what the terms were for these licenses and certainly not debating that. Both parties can gain significantly from this but all im saying is UPenn is not spending a ton on this. Mainly, they are contributing their expertise and patients which im happy with at this point.
Team INO, I've always put down what I think is the truth, so I will continue to do so here.
I don't believe this arrangement is any kind of new partnership between INO and UPenn. First off, what is UPenn putting into this? All standard medical care (surgery, chemo/radiation) will be paid by insurance/medicare/medicaid. The only thing that won't be paid for is the vaccine (which INO will provide), administration of the vaccine, follow-up visits and research assistant time. These things are not expensive and if you have clinician with some non-clinical research time, they can donate their time to this cause. What I'm saying is that the contribution by UPenn is not huge. What UPenn gets from this is pretty clear--they get the acclaim in helping further this research and some publications. Just MHO.
delivery, I was surprised that Rehdvm questioned the acronym but I went with it. I'm not here enough to understand what poster is what and what someone's intentions may be. Thanks for backing me up when you can.
Thanks Geezerbela, I have had to deal with one of the most difficult IRB's in the country. So I know I know...I definitely hear what you're saying. Just because an IRB (and the FDA) clears something, it doesn't mean that the trial design will lead to success. I'm just trying to initiate a healthy conversation. BTW, you're right that a placebo group in this instance would be unnecessary, but a control group must exist for statistical purposes. Historical controls makes sense and it would be nice if they could even match treatment modalities IMO. Anyways, the safety part of this study will be paramount--given the inhibition of stem cells (i.e. marrow, etc). Any peak into efficacy would obviously be huge and we may see that with dose escalation (and perhaps if they have latitude in timing vaccine injections, as Rehd had indicated).
Thanks Rehd. Nice to have a number of intelligent replies on this thread.
Sorry, BP=big pharma...lol.
Curious about your answer 3. You think they will have the latitude to vaccinate when desired (and based on immune response)? Did you see this somewhere? It would be nice to see the protocol. I'll look at their website tonight.
I guess one of the points I'm trying to make is that the success of the IP may depend on patient selection and timing of drug delivery. I wish I could have a scientific discussion with the CMO on this topic. Anyways, thanks for your responses.
If there was no anonymity on a message board, 99% of posters would not post here. I, for one, don't want to be risk being harassed. Never worked for the CIA...although interestingly, they do hire physicians.
I'll look more closely when I have time, perhaps their website. Unfortunately stage 4 pancreatic CA is not operated on as it does not extend life.
What's funny about this message board is that you have no idea who the heck is on the other side. It's good and it's bad. On one hand, I must stay anonymous because the other option is too risky. On the other hand, I'd love to show you who I am. In the end though, you'll just be a worthless piece of turd.
As an aside, why is it that the short and distort argument always resorts to name calling and fear rather than fact? This is not a pump...as simple as that. And I am certainly not pumping, I'm asking intelligent scientific questions. At least figure out what is what before you bash.