Immupharma Share Discussion Threads

[nobbygnome] 16/5/2018 12:39

>> Francis

So going back to your previous point, do you agree anifrolumab is a completely different scenario from Lupuzor?

[che7win] 16/5/2018 12:39

I would like to hear Prof. Muller elaborate on P140 platform being the first platform that provides full remission for anti-dsDNA patients. It's a first for Lupus patients.

And with no serious side effects.

IMM can concentrate on talking to the 11 interested parties and doing a commercial deal. Whoever wins gets a big prize.

Really looking forward to more detailed drill down being published.

[wigwammer] 16/5/2018 12:39

Francisgalton - worth mentioning also that the anifrolumab trial screens for dsDNA or equivalent, as did the most recent benlysta trial ie the market leaders are now asserting that the screen is key - imm are not cherry picking data.

[cudmore] 16/5/2018 12:36

Just filter nobby! The board becomes a nice positive place without his idiotic comments. 50p target still!

[nobbygnome] 16/5/2018 12:36

Under the conditions tested they have proved that there is no statistical significance so from a regulatory point of view it hasn't worked. That is all that matters here. Will the regulators approve it on the data generated.

You are talking semantics which are not relevant for the realities here.

Nobby

[wigwammer] 16/5/2018 12:33

Four weeks after the trial result and there is still no sign of either regulatory body stopping the extension trial on ethical grounds. So either the regulators have turned unethical or they are not as convinced as some (not involved in the process) who claim Lupuzor is a dead duck. Amazingly - they want to see all the data available before reaching a conclusion.

[francisgalton] 16/5/2018 12:32

For Nobby gnome

Let’s go back to the discussion yesterday and develop it a little further.

I gave the example of tossing a coin four times as the equivalent of an underpowered trial. If it is heads four times in a row (not statistically significant) I have not proven that the coin is not a fair coin.

Your response was “PS and you also haven't proved that it is a fair coin. So you can't make any reliable conclusion about the final result. Agreed?”

I disagree. You can conclude that it is worth tossing the coin a little more to see if it is fair. Indeed it would be positively wrong to conclude either that the coin was a fair one or that the test of the coin as fair was now dead because the coin was proven to be fair (paraphrasing your point)

In other words with results like this, you further test the positive data and power the trial properly.

In Immupharma’s case, the trial was underpowered. The anti-dsDNA patients clearly merit further investigation (a short trial of 300 patients should suffice). There is a 91% chance that Lupuzor has an effect in anti-dsDNA patients and a 9% chance that the improvement shown was just a random result.

We also know that these patients have active disease, constitute 60% of lupus patients and with the same data it would have been statistically significant with just 200 patients, half on placebo.

It is important not to conflate statistical significance with actual proof that the drug works or does not work, particularly where other reasons can be responsible, eg an underpowered trial or one with the wrong entry criteria.

It is also important not to say a drug does not work because the trial was P3 rather than P2. That is just a label. If the trial was underpowered or has the wrong entry criteria it just needs an adjustment or further test.

A bit like the coin example.

[nobbygnome] 16/5/2018 12:24

Correct it is the conventional approach of neutralising a cytokine which is pathogenic when produced in large amounts. This is completely opposite to the pie in the sky MOA theories put forward by Muller for Lupuzor.

Strangely the approach of neutralising cytokines has worked well in RA, CD, UC, PSA, AS, PSO....shall I go on. Yes there are side effects.....but that's what you get when you have a drug which actually does something.

Nobby

[mcsquared] 16/5/2018 12:22

"This is all completely different from Lupuzor I think you will agree"
Not least of all on the fundamental principles of the technology base upon which it is founded.

[nobbygnome] 16/5/2018 11:47

>> Francis

LOL I will reserve that judgement for the much larger and statistically reliable phase III which is about to be published.

My assertion with Lupuzor is that it has never shown a statistically significant result with the pre determined end point. Yes by cherry picking a sub group they got significance but overall every trial at the current dose levels has failed.

Anifrolumab on the other hand got a positive result on the pre determined end point. Yes the higher dose was not significant but that is the nature of Lupus when you have low numbers in a group. However, the phase III is a much larger trial of 180 patients per group which means there is a good chance of a positive result. In addition, there is credible MOA information which shows good evidence that interferon alpha is involved in the pathogenic process. Yes nothing is certain and yes if the p value is not significant in the phase III trial, then it will have been proven not to work.

This is all completely different from Lupuzor I think you will agree.

Nobby

[rnsday] 16/5/2018 11:23

I think your last sentence hits the nail on the head here :)

[francisgalton] 16/5/2018 11:18

For Nobby gnome

Anifrolumab also failed to show statistical significance in its primary endpoint at P2b on the higher dose.

According to your posts yesterday, I assume you conclude anifrolumab is proven not to work?

Same with your comments about cherry picking and inverse dose relationships.

Or do you have one set of reasoning for Lupuzor and another set of reasoning for everything else?

[rnsday] 16/5/2018 11:05

Hope you don't hurt yourself to much ... honest 😂☝A039;️

[coldspring] 16/5/2018 11:05

Ah datait you massive 10% trader knew you would be along for your de ramp to get in lower for when it retraces to 31-32. Regular as clockwork

[datait] 16/5/2018 11:03

FALLING OFF A CLIFF NOW LOL

[kop202] 16/5/2018 10:50

Could be dementia.....thinks hes on the Faron thread

[rnsday] 16/5/2018 10:45

No problem that's the only reason I started posting here as I have said he can not come here and be 100%sure the drug is dead and a dud so he is misleading investors he said a while back he would no longer post here that was a lie to :) I really don't understand why he is still here day in day out so concerned about what is been discussed here even tho he has no shares makes little sense to me but does please me that someone who is retired and has no shares here spends all their time posting ps I am pretty sure on his true reason here :)

[bmcb5] 16/5/2018 10:44

Stale, trapped, bitter bulls, who just want an echo chamber

[andyr42] 16/5/2018 10:36

Thanks rnsday for standing up for truth.

[rnsday] 16/5/2018 10:33

Looks like it from the thumbs up on his posts 👍There's another from me ☝️ʊ39;

[francisgalton] 16/5/2018 10:18

Anifrolumab has the same inverse dose response that you criticise Lupuzor for.

It has a poor side effect profile and is expensive.

Even if it does pass, it will likely be no more competition than Benlysta.