|Interesting find Bob, glad to see you back as you're one of the only posters who I pay close attention to. |
However one additional perspective on shorters is a potential lack of accurate info by their scientific advisors.
Take for example G1 Therapeutics, GTHX. I see they will be presenting oral data at ESMO on mTNBC, and their early PFS data looks quite impressive, if memory serves around 8 months.
At ESMO GTHX will present OS survival of their drug added to chemo in mTNBC, and the title of the talk tips it's hand to state that OS will prove to be better than chemo, thus the oral presentation. Could it numerically prove to be better than our Ph2 data?
My two cents, ether bong or not, is that this is a near-term risk for our beloved IMMU, but only if scientific advisors and investors alike don't understand GTHX's trial design in its intricacy.
Note the GTHX mTNBC data includes treatment naive patients. Prior lines of treatment were 0-2, vs IMMU-132 showing stellar results in 2-12 prior lines of therapy. Totally different ballgame to compare PFS & OS in 0-2 lines vs 2-12 prior lines of therapy.
Plus the GTHX includes ~75% of patients with ECOG scores of 0 whereas the script is flipped for Sacitucumab Govitecan, ECOG of 1 was in the ~75% range. Don't get me wrong, there seems to be solid benefit to the GTHX drug in mTNBC when added to chemo, my question is what will be the impact when it gets added to IMMU-132?
All this to say, to those IMMU hedge fund institutional shorters out there thinking you're smarter than me and bob and a handful of others here, I suggest you consider hedging IMMU by buying GTHX.
On that note, I suggest Bezhad considers acquiring GTHX, or vice versa, seems like a ton of synergies between both of these companies, both from a pipeline perspective and mechanism of action of their respective drugs for combo considerations.
Go mu, thx.