We are all still waiting on you or one of your other ID's to post one negative about ONCS. Yes, Electroporation when combined with a bad drug has failed, yes, IL-12 is toxic, which is why electroporation is recquired. Please tell me why ONCS is a failed technology? Tell me why IL12 does not work give me something so I can stop wasting my time here. Please I beg of you, set me straight. Tell me, show me, give me a reference, a link, something, anything. Name one thing, one treatment that has greater potential to turn non responders to responders. I reallly want to make money, telll me how, tell me where to look.
I would sell this company for $2, but I don't think Punit will. After interm data on P2B we wont' sell for less than $5 and that is 6-8 months from now.
brian, I can understand the concern about competition. However, while you are thinking about it, think about how Merck and AZN will respond. Also, BMY acquired IL21 back in 2010, and are just now finishing mouse trials and registering (this month) for a phase 1. They are not recruiting yet. So competition is well behind. Furthermore, I believe this shows IL therapy is something everyone is looking into and trying to find an effective treatment. IL-12 is the best I have seen and I have looked at quite a bit.
I don't think the IL-21 conversion rate is as important as the IL-21 vs. IL12 therapy rates, the conversion rate of IL 12 will be vastly superior IMO.
Seriously people. DD challenge here. Go compare ONCS IL-12 electroporation to IL-21 done by zymogenetics. You'll see ONCS is superior. Take the next step, and see what IL-21 in mouse studies does, and figure what IL-12 will do.
IL-21 is in the same family as IL-2, with less efficacy and less toxicity. IL-2 has already been tried in several trials, all having potential and none continuing on toward a marketable drug due to toxicity. IL-12 in a different family of IL DNA plasmids has a greater efficacy with significantly greater toxicity, however ONCS has solved that issue. There is a reason IL-21 is being used by BMY, do some DD.
ONCS only short fall is a lack of PR. When few people understand what ONCS brings to the table its hard for them to see it as any other biotech. ONCS really has what it takes to own immunotherapy. You know BMY is looking into PD-1/IL-21 trials? IL-12 beats IL-21 in both response rates (60%-35%) and side effects (5 minutes of mild pain to flu like symptoms and vomiting). Why do you think BMY is looking at IL-21? Because they need something to boost the 40% response rates that PD1 drugs get. They know this, ONCS holds the key.
IL-21 by the way when combined with a PD1 drug has a significant effect on response rates. Just imagine what IL-12 will do? Article coming.
weasel, I disagree. I think ONCS is worth .78 right now. I believe that institutional investors did DD prior to buying in at .71, and I believe that the lack of news and PR has dropped the price to a ridiculous level. It won't be long and the price will come back up to a fair value of .75
zero, thanks for the tip. Can you explain why GTHP has no chance of going down? Can you explain how much DD you've done on ONCS to believe it has a chance of going down? How do you come up with 7 years when the CEO said 2 years to marketable product? Why do you think ONCS will have to do a phase 3? Why do you think the PPS will be the same in 6 months as it is now?
not a problem. I know not everyone has all day to focus on stocks, so I will help out, and give some direction. I hope you and others will continue to challenge me, keeping me honest, and keeping yourself informed
kevin, I have posted this before.
Catalysts coming IMO
Phase 2 melanoma final (next 3 weeks)
Phase 2 melanoma expanded trial interim (next 6-8weeks)
Phase 2 interim mcc data (6 weeks)
Phase 1 Breast cancer (4Q)
Phase 1 melanoma 1 year survival data (4q)
Phase 2 Interim T-cell 4q/1q15
Phase 2B start and partnership 4Q
bio, its frustrating. It all comes down to bad PR. Think of how many companies out there that have less to offer, but put their focus on PR not science and have a higher market cap. I suggested on IHUB that we investors form an unofficial PR dept for the company and do what we can to get the word out. I realize it may be early to do that, but the time is coming.
Oil, that is a anti PD1 trial. ONCS whole theory is that IL12 increases the efficacy of anti PD1, so I see this as a guarantee future partner. If both companies have completed trials showing results for MCC, and ONCS has at a minimum interim data from combo Melanoma trial. Do you really think these guys won't be knocking on the door with cash in hand?
I'm actually surprised he answered you, that was not a question most CEO's would answer. However, one of the many fears us retail people have is that someone knows something we do not. If it was a truth, there would be a reference or an explanation. And most of the time you know as much as anyone else
Its not the lack of communication that bothers you or any of us. Few companies communicate with their shareholders more than quarterly reports. The problem you, me, and everyone else has is an almost 50% drop in price for no reason. We want the company to do something about it, however there is not much they can do. Punit said he was aware of no material reason for the drop in price, they are updating their milestones, and hopefully they will put out a blog on Dr. Pierce presentation from last week. However, there may not be much to say about it. So we continue to wait, Phase 2 results are coming, along with interim data on MCC and expanded Melanoma. After that we can hold our breath for partnerships.