Immupharma Share Discussion Threads

[newtothisgame3] 17/4/2019 04:10

#ImmuPharma #PLC
#IMM : #LSE Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD)
2019 Apr 16 DAILY
Short-Term #Bullish

[wigwammer] 14/4/2019 22:11

Thanks njb. There were quite a few longer term thinkers on the RENE board at 50p who were likewise worried about funding. I thank them for their shares at that level and will happily discuss funding now the price is 237p. Best wishes :)

[njb67] 14/4/2019 20:03

Wig

If you are simply trading the news, then yes, you are correct, some promising results should lead to a short term increase.

Your OP had referenced the patents as being an issue, hence me raising the funding. It is an issue if you want to think longer than short term news flow.

GL.

[wigwammer] 14/4/2019 19:16

"So if the share price triples here on some "promising" data..." then job done. I made 250% on HVO last summer, and 300%+ recently on RENE. Both reratings were prompted by promising data. Neither company has the ability to fund the products to approval. Market will respond to the data at this stage. ATB :)

[njb67] 14/4/2019 13:37

borromini

I had £50m in mind for re-running the trial programme plus a similar amount to keep the company ticking over for next four to five years until Lupuzor was available commercially. So a fund raise would be double the market cap even if the share price tripled from here. So a 66% dilution.

On the trial programme, they may need to re-do the dosing studies as well as run the phase 3 programme. I would also expect any phase three study to be larger than the failed study. I would also not be surprised if the regulators now want two phase 3 studies rather than one.

[kirk 6] 14/4/2019 11:34

Mid 50s and I would retire. Can see this hitting 50p on good news

[nobbygnome] 14/4/2019 11:22

>> borromin

Good post (34049). I predict they will come out with some theory after excessive analysis of the data which shows that the drug seems to have increased efficacy in some small sub group of patients. However, at the dose they are using, the drug has virtually no effect and it will just be down to the nature of the disease waxing and waning. If you analyse any group of Lupus patients, by chance you will see differences so the chance of getting anything meaningful out of the OLE is minimal. After all the patients know they are getting drug so the placebo effect will be high. That is why such data is not submissible....

And your point about the lack of publication of further analysis of the data is a very good one. I strongly suspect the data is all over the place and there is no coherent story.

[borromini1] 14/4/2019 11:15

njb67 - IMM market capitalisation today 14.6 million GBP, IMM stated re-run of phase 3 trial would cost approximately 12m GBP.

Adding that to your scenario of market cap. tripling on some “promisingR21; data the subsequent fund raise dilution will be 25% (15m/(45m + 15m)).

If re-run succeeds raising cash to move to market will be comparatively easy as the share value will be considerably higher at such a time, such as the peaks last year.

Any big pharma deal would need to be equally compelling or better for Dr. Zimmer and friends to accept.

[njb67] 14/4/2019 10:05

Wig

So if the share price triples here on some "promising" data - and bear in mind IMM would have at best a hypothesis that needs testing - they would still need to raise many times their market cap to conduct the phase three studies that would be needed. Plus money to exist until circa 2023 when the trials report. And then some more while they go through the regulatory process, another 12 months.

Whether an initial upfront investment or staged payments, the investing company would take most of the equity in return.

There is a reason that this is a near penny share investment.

[wigwammer] 13/4/2019 16:44

"Exemplary". I agree and many thanks! Mid 50s really isn't that early to retire. Sorry to break this to you :)

[nobbygnome] 13/4/2019 16:20

LOL whereas of course your people skills are exemplary....

Let's get back to IMM. How is your shareholding doing?

[wigwammer] 13/4/2019 15:45

There there nob. Perhaps if was your people skills that let you down. Been retired since my mid-30s thanks, many many years before you. ATB :)

[nobbygnome] 13/4/2019 14:33

Please ask him about Incanthera for me. Yet another failure to add to his collection...

[nobbygnome] 13/4/2019 14:30

A very curious comment..... I have no need for conventional employment as I retired (very early) a year ago. You should try it some time....

Actually I think it is time for Tim to retire as he has lost the plot...

[wigwammer] 13/4/2019 14:26

NobTim says hello and hopes you found employment elsewhere. :)

[nobbygnome] 13/4/2019 13:22

>> wiggie

You are fooling yourself if you think they are going to get good enough data to facilitate either 1 or 2.....

Hope that helps. I can't believe you are still invested here....

[wigwammer] 13/4/2019 13:01

Njb - they have two potential avenues, which are entirely typical for a small cap biotech:1) they produce promising data, the shares rise and the necessary dilution is achieved at a higher price. Shareholders are quids in.2) they produce promising data, and a larger company offers them a milestone/royalty agreement which funds further development. Shareholders are quids in.Bottom line - if they produce promising data then shareholders will likely be well rewarded. If they don't produce decent data, shareholders will lose out. Same situation as with any other development stage biotech. Hope that helps :)

[njb67] 12/4/2019 19:37

Wig

The other big issue is the lack of money to conduct the work needed to develop Lupuzor. With a market cap of just £15m, IMM are not going to be able to raise the monies needed for the studies unless they give away circa 90%+ of the company to a potential investor.

[wigwammer] 12/4/2019 17:01

The efficacy data from the MAP study will have limited use for regulatory purposes. The safety data will be of use. From a commercial pov, interest may be heightened if the MAP study shows: 1) the number of people seeing an enduring absence of symptoms rises well beyond what would be expected if the drug were a placebo - something that the 2018 RCT result hinted at. No control required here.2) the efficacy difference between those with and without the dsDNA marker becomes even more pronounced as the trial progresses - something that the 2018 RCT result also hinted at. The control is effectively one dsDNA sub group against the other. Prior to the MAP result, we will get the RCT extension results. Again, if the extension study signals that either or both of 1 or 2 become more pronounced, the market is likely to respond favourably. Both studies have a purpose and value.The key issue IMM face beyond demonstrating efficacy is patent life. From memory - US patent for lupus to c2027, Europe to c2032. Not long enough for lupus imo, but if it works there, it may prompt interest in other indications. GLA :)

[nobbygnome] 11/4/2019 21:15

njb67 is correct. Data from an open label study is not submissable for efficacy purposes because there is no placebo group to be compared against. However, of course safety data from such a study can be submitted.

[njb67] 11/4/2019 20:28

KoP

It is to enable those in the trial to continue treatment if they so wish (they would have not known if they were on active treatment or placebo in the original study) as well as for IMM to collect some more information. At best, it may help them figure out if there are a group of patients who appear to do well on the drug.

IMM would then need to then conduct proper phase 3 studies, so the open label study is not a route to the licence.

The phase 3 studies will cost them tens of millions, money they do not have. Even then, the trials may flop again.

[newtothisgame3] 11/4/2019 12:17

YES 100% a lot of big pharma take that route now

[kop202] 11/4/2019 12:04

Can anybody explain the purpose of an "open label Study"Is it another route to FDA approval?

[newtothisgame3] 11/4/2019 10:55

#IMM triggered a breakout alert.
👀🔥🚀 LOOK