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.
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.
I thought you guys didn't like his tweeting. Poke Poke. :)
Also, we are stacked with catalysts right now.
1. Merkel interim data at any moment (once enrollment is complete).
2. Meeting with FDA ("few weeks" from 5/29--Marcum Conference).
3. Partnership likely to be announced right around the meeting with FDA.
4. Pre-Clinical data around potential new trial, data surrounding the foundation proteins in IL-12, new non-cancerous indications, etc. to be released at any time.
5. The release of names of institution(s) that bought into the direct offering (If Baker Brothers or someone like that--could run big-time on that alone).
6. The biggest factor---When the hedge funds/institutions that work with the MM's to keep the price down so that can accumulate let go, we would easily see huge gains on no new news at all, (aka Feb).
It will be all good. Remember the four factors for biotech:
1. Awesome science: Check--nobody has better science than us. Period. ASCO put its stamp of approval on ONCS. Period.
2. Institutional investment: Check. Name another Biotech that has 30% of its shares owned by institutions and has a pps under .70? I can't think of one.
3. Cash position: Check--After the offering, we are in a great cash space.
4. Big Pharma validation--right around the corner (almost check). Remember Punit said to Zoridan that ONCS has turned down multiple partnership deals because they weren't good enough. The deal Punit strikes is going to be big. We all know it. All big pharma with anti-PD-1's need us and we need them. WE ALL KNOW IT.
These are the days where you just need to trust what you own. The pps doesn't reflect the science or the market potential at all. I was looking at INO's chart again and noticed that they were in the .60's at this time last year. $3.00 in late August. Patience is key. When it goes it will really, really go.
When was I complaining about his tweets?
It's amazing the things we talked about when the pps is boring. When this thing takes off, we all will be loving Punit's tweets. :)
No doubt. We all know this story. But, I'm more interested in your thoughts on the possibility of a combination phase 1 trial with INO as alluded to in the article.
Ok, so I'm not crazy. If INO wants to do a combination trial with IL-12 in head and neck, it goes through ONCS. Interesting.
I was wondering if the below means that INO will have to partner with ONCS for the IL-12/EP component? I don't think so but I have to ask.
From the article:
"Inovio stated in its Q1 report that we can expect the company to initiate two separate Phase I/IIa studies of VGX-3100 against HPV-caused cervical cancer and head and neck cancer. Both of these studies will test VGX-3100 as a complimentary component with DNA-based immune activator IL-12. This combination is designated INO-3112. Current studies utilizing IL-12 has demonstrated positive early-stage clinical data. Companies such as OncoSec and Merck have been closely monitoring the success of IL-12, and hope to harness its promising results within its own trials.
As Inovio management stated, these studies will analyze combination therapies utilizing VGX-3100, IL-12 and other DNA-based vaccines. Success in these studies can validate the potential of combination therapy and lead to next-generation development of vaccine and immunotherapy-based care.
Although the company has not released the anticipated enrollment population for these two new studies, it has addressed the approachable market of over 532,000 new cases of the disease caused per year, as well as over 275,000 deaths occurring on an annual basis from the disease. Thus, the market is sizeable and immediate, whereby Inovio is hoping, with positive trial results, to grab a leadership position in the field, attracting potential partnership agreements and the possibility of third-party funding"
http://oncosec.com/job-opportunities/
Duties & Responsibilities
Design, test, and document medical device electronic circuits.
Apply electrical theory, electrical testing procedures and related knowledge to layout, build, test, troubleshoot, repair and modify developmental and production equipment.
Provide conceptual, outline and detailed design for complex electrical engineering solutions.
Brainstorm new ideas and create new designs with the engineering team.
Operate computer-assisted engineering and design software and equipment to perform engineering tasks.
Confer with engineers, customers, and others to discuss existing or potential engineering projects and products.
Plan and implement research methodology and procedures to apply principles of electrical theory to engineering projects.
Provide input into project quality plan and implement quality practice in all projects.
Prepare feasibility studies, technical reports, specifications and other written documents for complex engineering solutions.
Prepare specifications for purchase of materials and equipment.
Maintain awareness and control of project cost, quality, scope, and schedule to ensure on time delivery of the project within budget.
Review documents change orders and engineering plans.
Facility and Equipment Qualification/Validation.
Verify, validate and document product designs.
Provide Engineering support for other departments as necessary.
Complete other engineering duties as assigned.
Cool!!!! Maybe that is why they are hiring a new engineer to figure out solutions like this. Dr. Pierce addressed this briefly last week where he said that he had no doubts that the "access" technology would be able to catch up to the need for more invasive cancers.
Do you think that we are going to get a PR on her hiring. Obviously, she is employed at ONCS but she won't reveal her employer on her site?
Could this be another orphan indication?
"Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, also called malignant hepatoma) is the most common type of liver cancer. Most cases of HCC are secondary to either a viral hepatitis infection (hepatitis B or C) or cirrhosis (alcoholism being the most common cause of hepatic cirrhosis).[1]
Compared to other cancers, HCC is quite a rare tumour in the United States. In countries where hepatitis is not endemic, most malignant cancers in the liver are not primary HCC but metastasis (spread) of cancer from elsewhere in the body, e.g., the colon. Treatment options of HCC and prognosis are dependent on many factors but especially on tumour size and staging. Tumour grade is also important. High-grade tumours will have a poor prognosis, while low-grade tumors may go unnoticed for many years, as is the case in many other organs."
I love this quote from her:
"Which is how I've come to refer to myself as the highest paid facilities coordinator in San Diego county. It's amazing what I've learned about the ventilation requirements for a biosafety cabinet, how to connect an ice maker drain that runs overhead, and what triple net means. That's all great, but now I'm ready to do science again and I promise, there will be some great medicines coming out of my lab very soon."
Yes. Eric Griesser art.
Thanks. BTW, I just sent you a tweet.
Z, I've appreciated your thoughts recently. :) Have you talked with management in the last few days?
Does anyone have an update when Punit would be allowed to comment on the direct offering and explain it?
That's exactly my analysis as well!!! 2 out of 3 is done. I believe the major partnership is there already. Punit said last week that he was in Boston for meetings BEFORE his presentation thursday. I think we are really close.
Guys, punit said two things at marcum:
1. We are doing phase 2 with a partner and said shelf was for negotiating that deal.
2. He also said about the shelf that they be opportunistic as well.
I think punit learned from the INO situation where it is worth offering shares to institutions at a lower price to create stability and legitimacy than doing a public offering at a higher price later. Also, these institutions talk to each other so hopefully this will spur even more institutional buying.
Did you see any Merck reps talking with dr Daud at ASCO?
Also, don't lose hope guys with this partnership deal. It's a bidding war for us, not the other way around. That's why hedge funds committed do much money.
No. The only reason that I can think of that Punit did the private offering at this price is that he knew he had a partnership deal in place that would significantly drive the pps up anyways.
Good post. We theorized all of that several times. I was just wondering if there was a scientific advantage for either oncs or Merck on this combo versus another pd-1.
So why do you think Merck's over other pd-1 companies in your opinion ?
Not sure I quite get this. Is this the exact Merck pd-1 (mk-3475) we have thought would be the partner all along?
Here is another paragraph from the prospectus that is also awesome. Wait, sorry I didn't answer your question yesterday but I think the prospectus is your answer:
"We are also conducting research and development on other targets with an aim to produce new drugs capable of breaking the immune system’s tolerance to cancer through the basis that several of the components of a highly immunogenic environment are lost in cancer. At OncoSec, we have the opportunity to bring these back via plasmid expression with electroporation. We can introduce, for example, pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, immune stimulatory receptors, co-stimulatory molecules, adhesion molecules, tumor suppressor genes and T-cell engagement molecules. Expression of these molecules can bring back the immune stimulatory components, block inhibitory molecules, and normalize cell adhesion and trafficking, all of which can increase TIL infiltration and lead to a more highly immunogenic environment."
No doubt. Thanks. I kind if feel that this significant and these efforts by oncs could be something huge and I've never seen it discussed, etc.
So, did oncs create this?
Ya, it looks cool. Have any of our science buffs heard of "indoximod" (drug candidate listed in the prospectus )it could explain in more detail how this works.
I just read the prospectus and found this:
"We are also conducting small-molecule based research and development with an aim to produce new drugs capable of breaking the immune system’s tolerance to cancer through inhibition of the indoleamine-(2,3)-dioxygenase, or IDO, pathway. We are currently studying our lead IDO pathway inhibitor product candidate, d-1-methyltryptophan or indoximod, in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute, or NCI. We believe that our immunotherapeutic technologies will enable us to discover, develop and commercialize multiple product candidates that can be used either alone or in combination to enhance or potentially replace current therapies."
Very cool.
Btw, I want one of those shirts if you get one. I'm M/L.
Actually, forget it. I shouldn't have asked. :)
Come on Z!!!!!! Let's hear it. Everything but alien invasion had been suggested ( maybe jumping jacks believes this).
That's great.
Validation is huge in biotech in the eyes of the investment community. There are three areas: science peer review, institutional investment, partnership. Oncs, in the last week has nailed the first two. The last is coming soon. My guess is 500 million partnership deal.
Hell ya!! That's why I was so excited. Go back and listen to him speak again on this. I don't this the placement yesterday was for phase 2b negotiation. I think it is to purchase some additional intellectual property that they have identified in the lab. This is really exciting to me.
Yes. I loved that part. The other part that really got me going was non-cancerous indications they are focusing on. That really peaked my ears up.
Yes. Deerfield is open market/warrants. This time private placement probably at the offer of the institutions.
I thought it was the opposite.
No. Warrants.