Immupharma Share Discussion Threads

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 18:18

The lanstead sharing agreement looks ok to me. In economic terms, the issue price effectively moves with the share price. So for example, if the shares move to 26.6p (100% above the benchmark price) and stay there for the 2 year duration, the company will receive £5.3m for issuing the 26.6m shares - an effective issue price of 20p. Looks like a pretty standard discount. If they don't make progress, less will be received but less will be needed. The positive is that it frees the market to respond to any good news, without fear of later hitting them with a discounted issue. Worked for the ph3 :)

[supernumerary] 26/6/2019 18:05

While the results of the ongoing treatment (not really a trial) are likely to be of interest, the real question is whether they'll be of clinical significance. It's worth looking a little more into anti-dsDNA - this:



for instance, concludes:

'Abstract

'Anti-dsDNA antibodies are the most studied antibodies of the lupus-related autoantibodies. The dogma is that these are the most important autoantibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus. In this review, evidence is presented to show that these antibodies (as measured by modern clinical laboratories) are not the most important autoantibodies in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus, and are of limited value in clinical correlation and in predicting disease flares. In addition, they are not likely to be the initiating autoantibodies in lupus nephritis. Thus, several pervasively held beliefs on anti-dsDNA antibodies are not valid. We suggest that anti-dsDNA antibodies should be considered as just one of the many autoantibodies associated with systemic lupus erythematosus.'

So even with an effect, IMM could still be heading down a blind alley.

[buywell3] 26/6/2019 17:14

somebody is in a bad mood here

and he is taking it out on others

[coldspring] 26/6/2019 16:37

Its your absolute obsession with immupharma even though clearly not invested that baffles me nobby. Are you short?Why were you first to post this morning, is it personal did Tim cross you somehow? I would concentrate on totally if I were you thats almost as poor in share price performance as here.

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 16:26

>> kirk

Now I am a man of leisure, after my 12k run at lunchtime, I have spent the afternoon watching the cricket and posting on the boards. A great afternoon...

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 16:24

I actually worked on trials in this disease and others so I think I know a little bit more than you.....but you will never acknowledge that so I know I am wasting my time. Nevertheless I have always respected your opinions as a well researched investor.

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 16:15

Nob - given the company has delivered a novel drug into the clinic and taken it through ph3, your qn is a daft one. The presence of positive anti dsDNA is certainly relevant and not impacted by placebo in the way you suggest. The level may also be of interest, I suspect there is no consensus, but given your other points have missed the mark I have little doubt you will try and suggest otherwise. Bottom line - the extension results may well be of interest to all stakeholders, contrary to your frequently repeated opinion :)

[kirk 6] 26/6/2019 16:08

Bloody hell mate how much time do you have to post on stocks you don't hold ?are you trading any others? Respect your knowledge here but do you make money on stocks ?

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 15:53

And you still haven't answered the question why you are still invested in a company which has such a poor record of delivering anything?

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 15:52

>> wigwammer

So you acknowledge the antibody level is of no consequence from an efficacy measuring point of view?

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 15:50

Similar to my thinking, miavoce. I have no idea of the result, perhaps it will show little of interest. But then again if a large number of positive anti dsDNA patients show no anti dsDNA and no clinical signs, that will be of interest :)

[miavoce] 26/6/2019 15:45

I appreciate that it doesn't conclude anything but it would corroborate what was found in the Europe cohort of the P3 trial where anti dsDNA positive participants who received Lupuzor had a statistically significant improvement over the anti dsDNA participants in the placebo group. Clearly further well designed trial(s) would be needed to fully prove the hypothesis.

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 15:39

And the antibody levels go up and down unrelated to treatment and disease half the time. Monitoring levels on an ongoing basis is pointless... Yes you can use them to identify a sub group but that is where the relevance ends.

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 15:38

But the effect on the actual levels of anti dsDNA is of no efficacy consequence. All that matters is the efficacy endpoints in that group compared to the negative group.

[miavoce] 26/6/2019 15:34

Since the phase 3 the focus seems to have shifted to the effect of Lupuzor on the anti dsDNA positive sub group. If the trials show a measurable physical effect on the level of anti dsDNA then this would imo be a positive outcome which has no reliance on a placebo arm.

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 15:10

Hmmmmm... how is a patient that knows they are anti dsDNA positive going to reduce the presence of anti dsDNA by taking a placebo? Let me help you out - they can't :)

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 15:03

Errr. My point is that a patient who is ant dsDNA psotitive and knows they are getting drug is more likely to have a placebo effect. Regulators know that, everyone in Pharma knows that so the results will be largely meaningless. Hope that helps.

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 14:57

I do not know who was short when the results came out. Why haven't you answered my qn?

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 14:55

LOL who was short when the Lupuzor result came out? I think I have a perfect grasp of the statistical outcome of trials. I really can't believe that someone as shrewd as you still has shares in a company with such a poor record of delivery.....

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 14:52

Poor old nob. He'll be at home now getting his knickers in a knot. To repeat, I do not know the outcome of the extension trial, but anyone who claims the result is of no interest probably doesn't understand stats :)

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 14:40

Not really nob. How does taking a placebo reduce the presence of positive anti dsDNA in a patient?

[kirk 6] 26/6/2019 14:36

Plenty of buying could tomorrow bring out good news?

[nobbygnome] 26/6/2019 14:32

Again they will know if they are anti dsDNA positive or not..... hope that helps!

[wigwammer] 26/6/2019 14:30

Yes. Can you explain why a placebo effect would impact the level of positive anti dsDNA in a patient? Can you explain why a placebo effect would impact patients with positive anti dsDNA more than those without? Many thanks :)