Something is happening. IMET is being publicized by JNJ with 36 or so international trials, the FDA is taking notice (ODD), and the medical successes are being believed by more investors. At the close, Geron is up 1%, while the S&P 500 is down 2%. Geron, I believe, has turned the corner, but the road higher will still be bumpy for awhile with the upward trend continuing.
Something is happening. IMET is being publicized by JNJ, the FDA is taking notice (ODD), and the medical successes are being believed by investors. Geron is up 3.5%, while the S&P 500 is down 1.5%.
I cannot find any significant negatives concerning IMET. As someone said, all people are different, so it is not surprising that not all patients get the same benefit (remissions to no benefit). No one drug or treatment will "cure" all cancers, but telomere shortening seems to have a place in most cancers. IMET, in combination with other drugs, should be beneficial in some cases (AML trials in Australia, for example).
Summary: The evidence indicates that Imetelstat (IMET) is safe, effective, unique and saves lives. From what I have read, Imetelstat, for a cancer medicine, has a good safety profile, with over 500 test subjects over several years. Also, I have read that, in the Mayo MF trials, there were some complete remissions, some partial remission, some improvements, and some stabilizations. In all, about 80% of MF patients showed some benefit. JNJ/Janssen is at the beginning of starting 36 or so global trials (USA and internationally) to gather new data and to enhance the original Mayo MF trials. Since JNJ has seen all of the data to date, and now has ODD approval from the FDA, they must be highly confident. Imetelstat appears to be in a class by itself, since telomere shortening is a factor in most cancers, including cancer stem cells.
Please edit or correct any wrong or misleading statements.
I don't know. However, as far as I can tell, no one else has made such a public statement. Lilly is working on the disease (Alzheimer's) and has apparently made some progress. They have not claimed a "cure" or anything close, as far as I know. Correct me, if I am wrong, with a link, or even a rumor.
Summary: The evidence indicates that you are correct. From what I have read, Imetelstat, for a cancer medicine, has a good safety profile, with over 500 test subjects over several years. Also, I have read that, in the Mayo MF trials, there were some complete remissions, some partial remission, some improvements, and some stabilizations. In all, about 80% of MF patients showed some benefit. JNJ/Janssen is at the beginning of starting 36 or so global trials (USA and internationally) to gather new data and enhance the Mayo original MF trials. Since JNJ has seen all of the data to date, and now has ODD approval from the FDA, they must be highly confident. Imetelstat appears to be in a class by itself, since telomere shortening is a factor in most cancers, including cancer stem cells.
Please correct any wrong or misleading statements.
You seem to believe the worst, that the Mayo results were "fixed' or dishonest, and JNJ is about to give up on IMET. I don't think so.
You are right, but what is keeping the PPS down? It seems that the IMET story of successes and potential is not generally believed. If the successes continue, and the trials (Mayo in the past, 36 sites coming soon) are honest, the PPS should rise significantly.
This near $4 consistency could only be maintained by a very powerful market force, that must be computer driven. IMET works, and seems to work well, and only provides good news as it evloves. IMO, this "price-hold-down" is temporary. ODD is a strong endorsement.
I do not see how the PPS can be held down with so much good news and obvious potential concerning IMET (ODD, JNJ, etc.).
" However, imetelstat, according to science literature takes on long and short telomeres in cancer stem cells and could be used as an adjuvant to other cancer treatments, and that's big." (from jackdaw605)
I am a retired non-biological scientist, so this telomere-science is new to me. You are preaching to the choir about the universal use IMET in all telomere sensitive cancers, with the blood cancer cousins first in line, followed by solid tumors and cancer stem cells. That is JNJ/Janssen's goal.
jackdaw605--I will be the first to admit that I,"--still don't get it". I don't claim to understand telomere-science. I thought the object was generaly to shorten the telomeres, and stunt the grow cancer cells. I think you are making a statement about the initial size of the telomeres, but I don't get the significance. Could you please expand that thought.
The only explanation is that there is a general belief by "dominant" investors that Imetelstat ultimately will fail, and Geron will collapse. The evidence points in the other direction, as far as I can tell (ODD approval and JNJ partner).
Have the shorts given-up in the face of overwhelming evidence that IMET is safe and effective?
"First, because telomere shortening and consequential tumor growth inhibition require many cell divisions, single-agent telomerase inhibitors require substantial time to significantly decrease tumor growth. Second, telomerase inhibition typically results in only a cytostatic effect, which allows tumor cells to acquire secondary genetic and epigenetic alterations resulting in drug resistance. Finally, single- agent telomerase therapeutics often fail due to activation of ALT pathways, which bypasses the requirement for telomerase." (previously presented on this board)
JNJ/Janssen partnered with Geron because "telomere shortening" is fundamental for remissions and possible cures for assorted cancers. The road to a cure seems to combine other medicines with IMET, although MF has been tamed with IMET alone (to date). JNJ has combined one of its own drugs (Doxorubicin) with IMET to treat AML (an MF blood cancer cousin). The last that I heard, those studies were happening in Australia with considerable promise. It appears that IMET, in combination with other drugs, becomes a more powerful force. The cure for cancer will involve IMET, but not as a "single-agent". Each form of cancer will involve telomere-shortening, plus some other treatment, for optimum results. There is much to be learned.
The 36 new JNJ global trial sites will be trying to answer that question. The fact that IMET brings about remissions at all is surprising, and tied somehow to "telomere-science". However, that begs the question of why some people get remissions, some partial remissions, some significant improvements, and some stabilization. I read a statement, that I cannot verify, that about 80% of MF patients benefit from IMET. These new trials will establish markers and indicators, that will increase the understanding of the science.
The 36 global trials should tell more about why some MF patients have remissions, and others do not. There is a complete science of markers and indicators, that is yet to be developed, around IMET and telomere length.