Immupharma Share Discussion Threads

[pulledpork] 03/1/2018 13:15

That's what I thought but why would the rate in group 1 decrease? Is that solely due to drop outs between interim and final?

[rabito79] 03/1/2018 13:11

I believe they thought the increase in the Placebo group was influenced by positive reports of the drug working.

[pulledpork] 03/1/2018 13:08

Cheers metis!
I was talking about this:


In the section 'dicussion' it says:
During the course of this study an interim analysis was per-
formed post hoc for licensing purposes, and these results had
to be disclosed according to the London Stock Exchange rules.
This had an impact on the final ITT week 24 results for both
overall and target populations as can be seen when the interim
week 24 SLEDAI results (table 2) recorded before the disclosure
in the target population and those of the ITT target population
are compared. The responder rate in group 1 decreased from
84% (interim) to 69% (final), but the absolute number of
responders increased, whereas in the placebo group the
responder rate increased from 45.8% to 56.5%. In group 2, the
changes were limited. The SRI responses in the placebo group
were particularly increased and the differences between the
Lupuzor and placebo group were no longer statistically signi
ficant. It has to be mentioned that in groups 1 and 2 of the
interim analysis (the active groups), the 12-week period pro-
vided 88% and 83% of the total SLEDAI responders versus 62%
in the placebo group, indicating that the disclosure effect was
huge. Therefore the week 24 data of the ITT group cannot be
properly analysed from a clinical point of view. We wonder if
the data recorded before the disclosure (table 2) are not the
ones which correctly reflect the efficacy of Lupuzor.

[metis20] 03/1/2018 13:01

pp - dosing was stopped after day 29 and the final data collected was at day 57 -

however, what do you mean by "final results" - can you give me a link.

Your other query -

From -

“The observation that the higher dose of IPP-201101 (3 × 1,000 μg) was less effective than the lower dose (3 × 200 μg) is also puzzling and needs to be examined further. It is possible that the bioavailability of IPP-201101 and/or its capacity to reach and selectively interact with specific targets or receptors differ according to its concentration. We might also argue that if IPP-201101 behaves like a partial agonist of the TCR, for example, its concentration can affect the quality of serial engagement of the TCR by peptide–major histocompatibility complex and further signaling and modulation (13)”

13 Itoh Y, Hemmer B, Martin R, Germain RN. Serial TCR engagement and down-modulation by peptide:MHC molecule ligands: relationship to the quality of individual TCR signaling events. J Immunol 1999; 162: 2073–80.

[pulledpork] 03/1/2018 12:49

Invested a relatively small percentage and before investing more I'm trying to get a better feeling for the likelihood of a successful phase 3. Therefore I've looked at the phase 2 study. Can anyone explain why the results for group 2 (treatment every 2 weeks) in the phase 2 were worse than the results for group 1 (every 4 weeks)? And also why were the intermediate results better than the final ones? They explained it by saying that the intermediate results had to be published via rns but why would they negatively impact the final results? Appreciate any help. Thanks.

[best1467] 03/1/2018 12:34

T MacCarthy stated in the Q&A that the patients we're carefully selected and we're patients with moderate to severe ,symptoms which is in my opion a major plus.

[hottingup] 03/1/2018 12:05

Great point Prof BB. I wonder if they have increased the proportion of moderate to severe patients in Phase 3, and thus increased the chances of success.

[husbod] 03/1/2018 12:01

Interesting prof but why you get 2 reds for that post is beyond me. Still, I managed 2 for a pretty innocuous post so obviously these objectors feel the need to get their money's worth for their L2 subscriptions.

[hamhamham1] 03/1/2018 12:00

oooh - in auction?

[professor bang bang] 03/1/2018 11:37

No one has mentioned IMM did an interim analysis during the Phase 2b trial, and found such a statistically significant improvement in the moderate to severe group even with a much lower number of patients, they were able to stop recruitment early (amended protocol) and begin planning for Phase 3. Its the moderate to severe group which really interests me.

Does that give me confidence in the Phase 3? Yes!

N.B.
The study was terminated with an ITT (Intent To Treat) population of 147 patients and the moderate to severe subgroup of 134 patients (90% of the ITT
population) in line with the amended protocol.

[nigsrodders] 03/1/2018 11:21

Barrie, so many people are now filtered that I sometimes have an update screen that is blank. Refreshing my screen is now so refreshing!

[barriew] 03/1/2018 11:17

Zho, i post sometimes, but half the people here now are filtered, it was a lot better here 1-4 years ago, with sk, waterloo, and several others, now all rampers or derampers.

[zho] 03/1/2018 11:15

So spake the pumpers' P.R.O.,
A man who really ought to know,
For he is paid for saying so.

[hottingup] 03/1/2018 11:14

Sylviane Muller, Lupuzor Symposium, Jun 2016
How Lupuzor works:

15 min 40 sec:

Evidence Lupuzor P140 works for other conditions:

41 min 30 sec:

Efficacy with other conditions verified by other independent researchers who are experts in these diseases e.g. Crohn's disease, Asthma, etc:

41 min 40 sec:

- Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) (Market size $4 bn) (SLE ends Phase 3, Q1 2018)
- Neuropsychiatric lupus (NPSLE)
- Gougerot-Sjögren syndrome (GSS) (Market size $2.2 bn by 2024)
- Rheumatoid Arthritis (Market size $28.5 bn by 2025)
- Gougerot-Sjögren syndrome (GSS) (Market size $2.2 bn by 2024)
- Crohn's Disease + Ulcerative Colitis (Market size $4 bn by 2022)
- Guillan-Barre disease
- Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP)
- Asthma (Market size $20.7 bn in 2015)

Other potential evaluations (to be tested Jun 2016 onwards):
- Scleroderma (Systemic Sclerosis, Raynaud)
- Psoriasis
- Multiple Sclerosis (MS) (Market size $20 bn by 2024)
- (Others to follow)

Negative preclinical results for potential re-evaluation:
- Type I Diabetes (Market size $43 bn by 2021)
- Amytrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)

IMM have a new Lupuzor patent (granted 2017) covering key markets (USA, EU, China, India & Japan) to 2032 & use in the majority of autoimmune indications. A new patent has also been filed to cover non-autoimmune indications. (IMM, Sep 2017)

45 min 50 sec:

As P140 proven to be safe via the Lupuzor trials, testing of it for other conditions can start at a Phase 2b or Phase 3, meaning approval for other conditions can be less costly and accelerated timewise:

46 min 16 sec:

[barriew] 03/1/2018 11:13

In my oppinion the ph11 trials are for side effects, what doses to try and determin which to go with, but a lot of companies show promise but not by much, but they try as they could have a decent drug.
Immupharma is different, its not a drug, its a modulator, no side effects from ph2 or ph3, and we have already had excellent results from the ph2 trial over 3 months, and the follow up checks with no treatment over 6 months.83% responders i belive it was.
The directors are positive, they have awarded all the options they can, 10 years allowance over the last 6 months, they are expecting a takeover and dont want anyone to miss out, reward all staff and anyone who has helped them this far.
We had 2-3 newspaper stories from the last 4 years people whos lifes have been transformed by taking Lupuzor, and one who said it was the only thing that had worked for her, all disscussed here before.
I certainly will be holding for results, been here from the 50's and my mind tells me the chance if success is greater than 90%
Nothing is certain in life, i cant predict what the price will be next week or in a year, but as tim macarth said investors will get a great return from investing here.

[hottingup] 03/1/2018 11:08

njb most of the valuations by posters here have been based on precedents within the sector and included calculations, so they are honest.

By your own previous admittance your personal suggestions were a 'guess'.

I personally don't care how IMM release the results but I imagine as they expect them to be good, they will be eager to release them asap via the usual news channels.

"we continue to see robust safety and we look forward with continued confidence to reporting top line results of the study in Q1 2018." (IMM. 21/12/2017)

[zho] 03/1/2018 11:03

Oh look - another 4 'investors' who have only ever posted on IMM: immy1992, stealth wealth, davew28, barriew

Great work guys!

[njb67] 03/1/2018 11:00

wig - no, just tired of the constant (and deceitful) ramping that is going on here.

ob - I do not currently work in M&A, I have in the past.

Was acknowledging HK post, off now.

Btw, predictions of 17 Jan for results are a little premature, it will be at least a few weeks after the data can be analysed before they are in a position to reveal the results.

You may want to ask IMM about their plans for releasing results - many companies use international congress to present the results of their studies.

[hottingup] 03/1/2018 11:00

And if Lupuzor beats Benlysta it will be 100%, especially as it has a SPA and Fast Track status from the FDA.

[barriew] 03/1/2018 10:56

Have a look as this fda link, the way i read it is once you get to ph3 theres 90% chance if success.

www.fdareview.org/03_drug_development.php

How can someone vite this down when its a FDA document,

[plain sailing] 03/1/2018 10:56

Most big pharmas would like to have IMM and all its drugs, platforms and IP in its portfolio, and would be willing to pay at least $11 billion based on the Kite takeover (whether that was for the platform or future revenues).

[plain sailing] 03/1/2018 10:54

IMM looks like a no brainer to me for the big time.

[obiterdicta] 03/1/2018 10:54

If you worked in M and A in big pharma and were always eyeing up acquisitions on behalf of your employer, would you on a bulletin board:

1. Accentuate the negative to try and influence potential share purchasers and keep a lid on momentum?

2. Accentuate the positive to keep momentum going, increase demand for shares and raise awareness of binary opportunity to substantially add value to your share portfolio?

OD