Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
No problem, reverend, I never thought you were being preachy. I was the one who pulled a bit of Proverbs 27:17 into my last post.
I fully agree that having a buyout as the exit strategy (unless the ink is already dry on the agreement and it's cleared all hurdles with the courts) is not a good strategy. I even have a percentage number of shares that I will immediately sell should a buyout be announced just in case it drags or fails. Certainly, we can include a buyout assumption in establishing a target price, albeit, I think it should be a small factor. The reason being that in this sector of small to medium start-up biotechs with the goods have a pattern of going that route.
As always, thanks for sharing.
I really don't have any view one way or the other. Adding shares for employee incentives aligns employees with corporate goals. This represents about a 3.5% dilution over several years (10M/280M) but preserves some cash that would be expended on salaries otherwise. ESPPs are generally another good way to do this without as much dilution (selling shares at a discount vs giving them away as incentive).
Badger - was not thinking that at all. Just realized my original post was too wordy and my point was not clear. Fully agree that everyone's exit point, be it based on price or a catalyst, will be different. The only additional caution I would make is having the reason/catalyst for exit being a buyout. The problem with that is that no matter how high the SP goes, the rationale for holding persists. I have ridden too many stocks way up, but just held for that reason and ended up riding it all the way down and lower. If a BO happens, its all great, but have an idea of when the SP gets to high relative to its value. If an individual investor thinks its overvalued, a CEO with even deeper knowledge will certainly think so (especially wanting a good return for the acquiring company).
Sorry if I sound preachy... not my intent, but I have been told I can come off that way.
GMH, I'm certainly not trying to put words in your mouth, so if that's how it came across, forgive me for that. One point that you did make (or so I assume) and that I whole heartedly agree with is the need to have an exit strategy as part of an overall investing strategy. But in today's world, I'm a dinosaur. From articles I've read, anywhere from 60-80% of stock trades are done with A.I. Algorithmic trading or quantitative trading makes self directed investors like me look absolutely prehistoric. Being of European descent, my Neanderthal DNA is likely high. Still, a good plan should define all parameters and that definitely should include an exit strategy, even though it's going to be different for each investor.
When chatting on a message board, I tend to gloss over many things that I take for granted and that I assume others would be thinking as well, but as you've pointed out, it's not always clear what's being said because we all come from different perspectives when looking at single stocks and individual companies (or most anything in life). We all have our own take on the 'facts" and so we try to strategize accordingly. I do agree with the point that I believe you've made before that it's in the sharing of info on these boards and through other sources that we can refine and improve our knowledge base and thereby increase our investing success.
So long as we're open to being challenged in what we say, I believe this shared experience is beneficial. Many have lost sight of the value of cooperative open debate and discussion, so to all of you here, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Without getting too biblical, iron sharpens iron...
Badgerkid
Does anyone have any thoughts on the proxy vote? What about the 2023 report? Thanks.
Corporate update at 4:30 p.m. ET. Thursday,
To listen to the live or archived audio webcast, please register at https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/m4tigan7. The live and archived webcast can be accessed in the Investors section of the Company’s website, IR.Iovance.com. The archived webcast will be available for one year.
Global Conference - not ASCO
ASCO Panel with Friedrich Graf Finckenstein.
https://milkeninstitute.org/panel/15342/next-wave-immunotherapy-and-cancer-treatments
Iovance Biotherapeutics to Host First Quarter 2024 Financial Results Conference Call and Webcast on Thursday, May 9, 2024
May 01 2024 - 6:01AM
It was not the purpose of my comment to influence how anybody puts on trades but rather to expand on your comment about why people buy and sell. If you only buy because you think a stock is going up but have no rationale, my experience is that investment does not turn out well. Also, if you do not have an exit strategy, it is easy to hold onto a position way too long. When buying, I find it is important to have an fair value price target/range for any long term core holdings. When that price/range is hit, regardless of why, I will sell/scale out of the position. For catalyst trades, I buy going into the catalyst and will sell if it runs up into the catalyst (street recognizing what I did) or sell after the catalyst (regardless of whether it pans out or not). Turning a trade into a core holding is generally a losing proposition. This is also why I generally will not increase my cost basis ... unless there is a significant change in facts that changes my intrinsic fair value.
For every transaction, there is both a purchase and a sale and I would venture to guess that most stock sales made because people think the SP is at fair value/heading down. Having said that, most of these transactions have no bearing on me or my valuation. The only real transactions that matter are those of insiders or the company itself as that may change the facts/information around the company.
Having an exit strategy/price is important. If you don't, it is too easy to get caught up in the hype of "wait until the next trial readout occurs" or "there is a buyout". Sometimes the stock runs up in anticipation of those and it becomes too easy to ride it back down.
GMH, thanks for the inside look at your process. If Iovance was only a one trick pony (shout out to Derby day), then I wouldn't be holding such a large core position and I would more likely try to time those known events with options. Because there are those unknown dates for future events and because Iovance is developing multiple TIL therapies along with potential combination therapies, I'm more inclined to hold a larger core position now so as to not miss some of those share price moving events that may take us by surprise (even a buyout). I agree that using options may be beneficial for the known events and can be part of an overall strategy, but I've been less successful buying calls versus selling puts when trying to time various events and share price reactions. I only sell puts when I'm willing to own more shares anyway and I do sell calls when I'm happy with the current price but I'm not in a rush to sell the stock. This way I get paid to wait and if they call away my shares, so be it. I am NOT currently selling calls on any of my IOVA shares. I am selling some puts from time to time at strike prices at or below our current price and less than 6 months out.
Bottom line, we buy stocks because we believe the price will go up. We sell stocks for many reasons that often have nothing to do with the stock price itself. You can't always pick the time when money is needed for something in your life (though some of my relatives have been removed from my list). This is why I say there's hundreds of reasons to sell a stock, but only one reason to buy it.
May the 4th be with you (shout out to Star Wars day).
Badgerkid
Badger... on a separate note, you had stated previously that there is only one reason to buy a stock... that you think the price is going up. I would expand that to say that there are several reasons why you think a stock may go up. Two of the primary ones I use for individual stocks are 1) that I consider the stock undervalued (these are longer term holdings) and 2) that I expect an upcoming favorable catalyst (these are trades where I usually use options).
For my intrinsic value estimate, once I model that out (either using simple metrics or more complicated methods), I plan to sell (or scale out) once that price is hit, regardless of if it got there because of company specific items, sector strength or some catalyst. I try not to adjust my model unless specific new facts emerge as it is too easy to adjust things in hopes the price will continue to go up.
Regarding catalysts, I split these into 2 camps, the first being ones that are time bound (i.e. earnings reports, FDA PDUFA dates, medical conferences, etc.) and the second are not time-bound (trial read-outs, buyouts, etc). Regarding the second group, those are impossible to trade since you won't know how long you have to hold the position in order to have them play out. This is particularly true if you are holding a stock for a buyout that may never occur. I use my intrinsic value calculation and if it hits that price because of a buyout, fine, but I want to hold my position for reasons other than I buyout because, in my experience, you can hold too long in many cases.
This would only work if you make a new drug combination. The old individual components would still be off-patent and would thus be subject to generics. Gilead is famous for combining their various HIV drugs from 3 pills to 2 pills to a single pill, each time creating a new patent. They still need to sell to physicians why the new brand formulary is superior to the old formulary off patent, but is easier to do, especially if they reduce/cover co-pay.
One could make the argument that if MRK bought IOVA, they could stop the ipi/nivo trials using BMY's ICI, but they already have 90% of the market and an additional 10% of 2,000 patients would not make a difference. BMY could use the same approach but I do not think increasing Opdivo/Yervoy sales would be a driving factor in a buyout decision. Any acquiring company would make a purchasing decision on buying the future revenue stream, not in protecting any current drugs on patent.
Looks like many are anticipating good news next week. PPS has clawed back nicely! New highs possible sooner than later I believe.
That is some good information and not off topic. Almost anything even remotely related is on topic! Keep up the good work!
GMH, a bit off-topic, and I'll try and improve on this discussion and my thoughts in the future, but one point that I keep coming back to is patent expirations and ways of extending those dates. Other companies may full well see value from acquiring Iovance so as to combine it with their products in order to gain patent protection for additional years (Merck, Keytruda).
This is an excerpt from an old article, but it's still relevant on a number of fronts: "Combinations Does one and one make three? That is the question drug companies are asking themselves these days as they face huge threats to their earnings from patent expirations. One novel solution: combining two or more successful drugs into one tablet and marketing it as a whole new product.
Schering-Plough is looking to extend its giant franchise in its allergy drug Claritin by combining it with Singulair, an asthma drug from Merck. Schering-Plough is not alone. Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Warner-Lambert are all looking to create new combinations of drugs to bolster earnings and sustain growth. Companies are getting a lot more creative in ways to sustain the product lifespan of drugs. The medical community looks at it as a kind of cookbook medicine. They have an aversion to combination drugs. Nonetheless, it is a strategy that has proved successful for some drug makers..."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3146086/
Here is another article I cam across that should be of interest. Couple of the highlights I would point out:
https://www.healio.com/news/hematology-oncology/20240418/lifileucel-approval-the-start-of-a-glorious-future-for-cell-therapy-in-solid-tumors
1) Eligibility for treatment (i.e. pulmonary, cardiac or renal issues) was 70%-80% (I had modeled 50%)
2) Significant ("huge") pent up demand for treatment including patients "expressing excitement for TIL" may require prioritization in treatment (wondering if having 12 patients in need but can only accommodate 4 is purely hypothetical). Note even 4/month per ATC is above capacity for the iCTC alone.
3) Ability to reduce IL-2 if toxicity emerges but treatment still effective (lowers the IL-2 revenue but greatly increases eligibility - good for patients and overall revenue)
4) Excitement about ability to extend into other solid tumor types over the next 5 years.
5) Washington University in St. Louis appears to be one of the next ATCs to on-board in 6-8 weeks (from April 21 so around end May target date).
I really do not worry about IP for IOVA. For small molecule drugs, the FDA only requires equivalency testing to then approve a generic so you do get a significant patent cliff. For biologics, it is much more difficult (and costly) to do an equivalency test so I do not see any generic coming into this space.
Regarding the stealing of IP, that is certainly possible, but IOVA would have recourse but would still require a significant investment to create the TIL product and would then require running trials and FDA approval so would be a multi-year theft operation. I feel most competitors want to build a better mousetrap, not copy the existing one, so that is the risk for me. Informal discussions at these biotech conferences where someone lets slip a detail where something worked or didn't work is probably the biggest risk, but not disclosing the entire process.
Thanks to everyone here, I appreciate the discussion and challenges to dig deeper on this investment as well as into this new approach to cancer treatment.
Getting into the weeds a bit, I'm still trying to fully understand another subject, that of patents and licensing. If anyone here has a good take on Iovance's IP portfolio, jump in anytime now or in the future. I see that Iovance has exclusivity on some that they license from others and Iovance also owns some that may be needed by other companies in this arena. Cross licensing will be a subject for a later date, but it will come into play most certainly. My hope is that Iovance has patents that are ultimately part of the standards and deemed essential and thereby have a value for licensing. A few recent patents apply to manufacturing which was thoroughly discussed in the Chardan chat. The ability to manufacture TIL on a large scale may be a big part of the future value of Iovance. Definitely something to watch.
https://patents.justia.com/assignee/iovance-biotherapeutics-inc
Thanks - these articles/videos for lead oncologists at the ATCs are probably the best indication of where this is going.
FYI, TScan uses IL-2 as there reinvigorating agent.
https://stocktwits.com/AuriniaBeach/message/571505436
TIL Therapy for NSCLC:5-1-24
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
By Julie Grisham
Great read & Huge Amtagvi potential.
#CureCancer
We discussed this a bit before but good to revisit competition as facts change.
My take based on my research and (limited and self-taught) clinical knowledge:
1) Obsidian data was an early read-out of the P1 trial. That trial is still recruiting and will probably not finalize until 2026. I am guessing the P2 trial would take about 6 years (1 year for design, 3 years recruiting, 1 year for data analysis and 1 year for BLA filing) from that point, so they would not be commercial until 2032.
2) OBX-115 is their revitalization agent is an IL-15. This is the same re-vitalizing agent in Anktiva (N-803) that IBRX uses. It seems that IL-15 revitalizes Natural Killer cells (NK cells) as well as CD4/CD8 cells. TIL replenishes the specific targeting CD4/CD8 cells that have been depleted by fighting the cancer as well as the ICI treatment.
3) IOVA's IL-2 analog seems to be a modified IL-2 to simply remove the toxicity impact from the IL-2.
Given this info, wondering if it wouldn't be good/better to investigate a combo IL-15/TIL to replenish the CD4/CD8 cells and reinvigorate both the CD4/CD and the NK cells. Will be watching this space to see how everything evolves.
Thoughts about OBX-115? How much of a threat is it to Amtagvi over next 3 years? Will it take significant number of patients away from Amtagvi as it advances its clinical trials and seeks accelerated approval? When does IOVA next generation TIL enter the clinic?
https://www.onclive.com/view/obx-115-elicits-responses-in-advanced-or-metastatic-melanoma
I appreciate everyone's input and questions on this site. I always believe that the collective thoughts of a group are always better than I can do on my own. My confirmation bias is probably my own worst enemy.
Also, Google is a good source but sometimes one needs to read beyond the headlines... thanks for any and all insights and corrections.
YW. I may not know the jargon here, but I do know some things.
I am trying to educate myself with this company and the scientific issues.
Form 10-Q calculator. Select the type of filer and the fiscal year end in the form below to obtain the EDGAR filing deadline.
Filer Type: Period End:
Large Accelerated Filer
31
Mar
2024
Due: Friday, May 10, 2024
https://www.securexfilings.com/sec-deadlines/
The Investopedia I'm reading says between 40 and 45 days depending on the size of the company.
GMH, let's make sure we're around for the next 10-K.
Have a great day. Time for me to go do something resembling work.
You are correct. 10-Ks (annual) are 60 days and 10-Qs are 35 days per Investopedia.
"The SEC decided to make information available to the public in a more timely manner in 2002. The new rules tightened these 45- and 90-day requirements to 35 and 60 days respectively."
GMH, is that for 10-Q's or just for the 10-K? I've seen different numbers, so if you have a link with the most current info, I'd appreciate it. I've seen older and newer info, but I honestly don't know what it is currently seeing how it's changed over the decades of my time on this earth (not centuries yet).
Thanks.
Public companies have 60 days to report so last day of May would be the deadline.
Surfkast, here's hoping the company let's us in just a bit on how well things are actually going. I think they'll remain somewhat conservative in what they share, but I do think we're going to get a good amount of very good news.
Still hanging in with the rest of us old timers?
Best wishes for our mutual success on this one.
GMH, I don't know if they could have filed a Q1 that late, but the date is set and I'm happy as well with regards to options. Good luck to you.
Glad they finally set the ER date. My broker had it listed as 5/7 and NASDAQ had it listed at 5/14... was afraid they might move to after the 5/17 options expiration.
I "want" a takeover price of $80-$100, but any CEO that brought that deal to their BoD would be putting their job in serious jeopardy. I just try not to let my optimistic views cloud my judgement of current fair value, which can lead to hanging on too long.
It could be pretty exciting next week!
May 9 - Iovance Biotherapeutics to Host First Quarter 2024 Financial Results Conference Call and Webcast on Thursday, May 9, 2024
"SAN CARLOS, Calif., May 01, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: IOVA), a biotechnology company focused on innovating, developing, and delivering novel polyclonal tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapies for patients with cancer, will report its first quarter 2024 financial results on Thursday, May 9, 2024. Management will host a conference call and live audio webcast to discuss these results and provide a corporate update at 4:30 p.m. ET."
https://ir.iovance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/iovance-biotherapeutics-host-first-quarter-2024-financial
GMH, instead of the usual historical takeover premium, I would much prefer a hysterical takeover premium as in crazy high. That way you'll be less disappointed that Iovance didn't go it alone.
Thanks for the reminder on those numbers and reference points. Keep sharing, it's always appreciated.
The Chardan chat is incredibly worthwhile to watch. If you want to see what kind of team we're investing in, you'll get a very good picture of the talent we have at Iovance, Igor Bilinsky, PhD and COO of Iovance. From a manufacturing perspective (and I worked in manufacturing earlier in my life), all of the questions that I had were addressed including a few I had submitted earlier.
Here's one more call giving even more reasons to stay long in my investment and a few intriguing comments that lead me to add more shares.
Good luck to the longs.
This was a manufacturing summit, not a head count of current patients, but what was discussed should give you a picture of just how big this is going to get going forward.
The big take-away - Iovance continues to stay one or more steps ahead of what they need going forward and they continue to be prepared for those potential risks that are outside of their internal control (governmental policies and such).
If you're a good observer of body language, you'll pick up on the bonuses in this chat.
Good luck to the longs.
Great job explaining for me via our conversation earlier today.
Your explained much better then I would have been able to, thank you.
Spot on in your message & if I caused GMH any confusion, my apologies.
We are on track so far & time will tell our story for us & Iovance.
#CureCancer
I had posted an article on historical take-over premiums in the biotech space here earlier, but had not seen any analysis on what happens to the acquiring company after take-over, thus my question.
Regarding take-over premiums, those are generally in the 80-100% range for biotechs the size of IOVA. If there is the expectation of a bidding war, it can go higher, but those are fairly uncommon as acquirers do a pretty good due diligence and get alignment before the offer. Most deals in the biotech space of this size are generally in cash since Big Pharma generally have a lot of cash on the balance sheet.
Generally, I do not plan on, nor want, a take-over as I would rather have the technology as a pure play rather than buried as a subsidiary within another company. Having said that, what I "want" is pretty much irrelevant, since my total share count/vote will not be driving any corporate decisions.
Gopher and GMH, just to add a little clarity (after chatting with Gopher earlier today), the point is that the company acquiring the company being bought does typically see it's share price drop upon acquiring the target company, but it often returns to its previous price and even goes higher if the acquisition proves to be a positive revenue generator for the buyer. To your point GMH, yes, the acquired company no longer exists with its own stock symbol because it is now part of the company that made the purchase (but it still may operate as a wholly owned subsidiary or similar). This is a question and concern that arises if the buying company's stock is part of the deal.
The parent company/purchaser does see a negative impact on its share price initially, but will likely see a gain if the deal was a good one.
In chatting with Gopher, he and I agree we don't always remember the facts as well as we would like, but I remember reading that many target companies stock price will go up to a number just shy of the initial offer as sellers come in to liquidate before the final date of the sale. But one thing I also remember reading is that sometimes the buyout price goes higher as more companies join the fray to acquire the target company and begin bidding up the price. So it's possible that was also part of the memory of which stock goes higher in price and when during that period of time before the deal is finalized.
Gopher, if I missed the finer points of our conversation, jump in when you have time and bail me out (if memory serves, we did have a conversation, right?)
Here's a quick synopsis of what I'm trying to say:
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/203.asp#:~:text=Key%20Takeaways,debt%20to%20finance%20the%20acquisition.
Two new events upcoming: Today - Chardan Annual Genetic Medicines & Cell Therapy Manufacturing Summit Fireside Chat: April 30, 2024 at 2:30 p.m. ET Virtual
In two weeks: The Citizens JMP Life Sciences Conference Fireside Chat: May 13, 2024 at 2:00 p.m. ET New York, NY Virtual
https://ir.iovance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/iovance-biotherapeutics-present-upcoming-conferences-13
Are you referring to the acquiring company? The acquired company would no longer be traded.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/63-ownership-shares-iovance-biotherapeutics-181522845.html
Interesting read on Iovance & Ownership %’s.
We are in a very good place in my opinion
#CureCancer
I read a BioTech Buyout Stat a while back that was quite interesting.
After a Buyout, typically 6 months after BioTech Companies are bought out, they are up 40% on average post sale.
Personally I will sell 20% Apprx of my holdings & retain 80% moving forward onward & upward.
In Wayne I Trust.
#CureCancer
Surkast, if you read the book For Blood and Money, with the focus on Wayne Rothbaum & the journey A to Z with the development of Acerta’s Cancer Drug & BTK Inhibitor.
It took years & its not just a build, pump & dumb kind of thing.
Wayne’s done this over & over & he knows exactly what to do, how to do it, how long it generally takes after FDA Approval.
Then we get now the Operational side of the Biz with the extensive ATC Buildout.
Last I heard we are at 41 or 42.
Wayne let the world know, the goal was 50 by the end of May.
By the end of May, I project IF we continue the ATC buildout, we are looking at 65-70 by end of May.
Wayne knows how to “play” this along.
Under promise & over deliver.
It’s his BioTech MO.
With our overseas pending approvals this & next year, Its my estimate we literally end up with EU, Canada, UK, Australia & possibly other countries hoping on board, literally.
Its really anyones guess here how many patients pr month, pr year our overseas ATC’S can/will generate.
Revenue will be churning & churning come 2025 & 2026
Buyout happens then.
My guess is anywhere from $100 on the low end, to $165.00 on the high end by earlyish 2026. Combined Stock Options & Cash.
Stay Strong Longs & read the book by Nathan Vardi. Like $15 on Amazon.
#Cure Cancer
Iovance Biotherapeutics is pioneering a transformational approach to treating cancer by harnessing the ability of the human immune system to recognize and attack diverse cancer cells in each patient.
Iovance Biotherapeutics aims to be the global leader in innovating, developing and delivering tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy for people with cancer. We are pioneering a transformational approach to treating cancer by harnessing the ability of the human immune system to recognize and attack diverse cancer cells in each patient. The Iovance TIL platform has demonstrated promising clinical data across multiple solid tumors. We are committed to continuous innovation in cell therapy, including gene-edited cell therapy, which may be a promising option for patients with cancer.
We are a patient-centric, collaborative organization that is driven to change the way cancer is treated. We are agile in our thinking and strive for excellence and innovation while acting with high integrity to create value for all stakeholders.
Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) are naturally occurring immune cells that fight cancer. TIL are on constant surveillance to recognize, attack and kill cancer cells. When cancer invades and prevails, the TIL are unable to perform their intended function. Investigational TIL therapies are designed to reinvigorate a patient’s TIL to fight cancer. A patient’s naturally occurring TIL are collected and grown outside the body so they can be administered back to the patient as a one-time treatment. Once inside the body, Iovance TIL therapy deploys billions of personalized, patient-specific TIL to recognize and target diverse cancer cells.
TIL monotherapy and TIL combination therapies are being investigated in clinical studies in multiple advanced solid tumor cancers including melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, cervical cancer and head and neck cancer.
AMTAGVI is the first FDA-approved T cell therapy for a solid tumor cancer and first treatment option for advanced melanoma after anti-PD-1 and targeted therapy
AMTAGVI deploys patient-specific immune cells that recognize and fight cancer
SAN CARLOS, Calif., Feb. 16, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: IOVA), a biotechnology company focused on innovating, developing and delivering novel polyclonal tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) cell therapies for patients with cancer, today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved AMTAGVI™ (lifileucel) suspension for intravenous infusion. AMTAGVI is a tumor-derived autologous T cell immunotherapy indicated for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma previously treated with a PD-1 blocking antibody, and if BRAF V600 mutation positive, a BRAF inhibitor with or without a MEK inhibitor. This indication is approved under an accelerated approval based on overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response. Iovance is also conducting TILVANCE-301, a Phase 3 trial to confirm clinical benefit.
AMTAGVI is the first and the only one-time, individualized T cell therapy to receive FDA approval for a solid tumor cancer. The proposed mechanism for AMTAGVI offers a new cell therapy approach that deploys patient-specific T cells called TIL cells. When cancer is detected, the immune system creates TIL cells to locate, attack, and destroy cancer. TIL cells recognize distinctive tumor markers on the cell surface of each person’s cancer. When cancer develops and prevails, the body’s natural TIL cells can no longer perform their intended function to fight cancer.
AMTAGVI is manufactured using a proprietary process to collect and expand a patient’s unique T cells from a portion of their tumor. AMTAGVI returns billions of the patient’s T cells back to the body to fight their cancer.* Authorized Treatment Centers (ATCs) will administer AMTAGVI to patients as part of a treatment regimen that includes lymphodepletion and a short course of high-dose PROLEUKIN® (aldesleukin).
https://ir.iovance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/iovances-amtagvitm-lifileucel-receives-us-fda-accelerated
File Date | Form | Investor | Prev Shares | Latest Shares | Δ Shares (Percent) | Ownership (Percent) | Δ Ownership (Percent) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2024-03-01 | 13G | PERCEPTIVE ADVISORS LLC | 11,979,415 | 19,221,743 | 60.46 | 6.90 | 46.81 | |
2024-02-14 | 13G/A | Point72 Asset Management, L.P. | 8,114,890 | 468,821 | -94.22 | 0.20 | -96.00 | |
2024-02-13 | 13G/A | VANGUARD GROUP INC | 14,463,082 | 22,812,820 | 57.73 | 8.91 | -2.73 | |
2024-02-09 | 13G/A | MHR FUND MANAGEMENT LLC | 12,083,951 | 20,083,951 | 66.20 | 7.80 | 16.42 | |
2024-01-26 | 13G/A | BlackRock Inc. | 12,076,276 | 19,071,756 | 57.93 | 7.50 | -2.60 | |
2024-01-25 | 13G/A | STATE STREET CORP | 14,715,475 | 16,424,388 | 11.61 | 6.42 | -31.12 | |
2023-10-27 | 13D/A | Quogue Capital LLC | 20,000,000 | 25,000,000 | 25.00 | 15.84 | 26.52 | |
2023-02-14 | 13G/A | Avoro Capital Advisors LLC | 8,675,000 | 7,020,000 | -19.08 | 4.40 | -20.00 | |
2023-02-06 | 13G/A | WELLINGTON MANAGEMENT GROUP LLP | 9,584,082 | 421,610 | -95.60 | 0.27 | -95.58 |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |