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.
Thanks, FYI. I take it the genetic engineering steps used by FATE are good enough to stop rejection for the transfer of NK or T-cells derived from iPSC. Do you think it's somewhat similar to the procedures used by Universal Cells? http://www.universalcells.com/technology/
INO presentation on 12/05 on Infectious Disease Antibodies.
https://www.terrapinn.com/conference/world-vaccine-immunotherapy-congress-west-coast/agenda.stm
Thanks. I was looking for articles in simple English rather than plowing thru SEC or Edgar info.
Does "off the shelf" mean cells without matching can be used for short durations like a few months for treatment?
For the compensation with stock options, do you think they give away for free for the directors or the stock options were based on a market price at a given time?
Interesting topic. Seems like a trade-negotiated issue rather than a health issue. Read more about it if you want:
http://theconversation.com/chlorine-washed-chicken-qanda-food-safety-expert-explains-why-us-poultry-is-banned-in-the-eu-81921
Nice poster and presentation. Thanks. For RP2 and RP3, why not put the PD1 inhibitor gene in the viral genome instead of keeping it separate? If not enough room, perhaps use PD1 instead of CTLA4 inhibitor gene in the virus.
Isn't that how the academic grant review process works? Are you suggesting a similar process be used in the pharmaceutical industry?
INO cancer immunotherapies used in conjunction with checkpoint inhibitors only create short-term changes of 1 to 2 months to one's immune system, since the type of DNA plasmids that INO uses is transient for the production of antigens or monoclonal Ab. A repeated electroporation is needed should one want the effect to last for more than 2 months.
For short duration of fewer than 2 months, INO bought the patent to use an inducible promoter for expression of proteins, though it's not clear that'll be needed.
The immune boosting effect from IL-12 is probably temporary using a transient plasmid for delivery of DNA vaccines.
Developing a Humira Equivalent is probably just to show potential buyers that INO's DNA plasmid + electroporation for making a product is price competitive.
Jump in INO stock would come if any of the phase 2 combo-results with MedImmune, Genentech, and Regeneron are synergistic. Increase in funding from Gates Foundation would happen when DNA vaccine is starting to take the place of protein vaccines.
Interesting article with a significant finding. So growing the Flu viral sequence in chicken eggs would also cause mutations in the viral head protein region to enhance better growth in eggs. Then all the experts chimed in to ditch the eggs manufacture process, but it would be very expensive. Well, time to think out of the box and go INO.
Yes, perhaps the algorithm is to give the shorts a sense of complacency, and then to have another round of squeeze.
Using the current price as a reference, it took more than 1 yr to double by going backward. It's likely to double from here by going forward in 1 yr.
Some know about INO, since ONCS got a vote of 10. In this type of contest, people tend to pick the Blackhorse candidates.
The reasons why have been listed in this recent article:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4134830-inovio-poised-breakthroughs-2018-beyond
The cure rate of HPV infection without any medical treatment is traditionally high. In this clinical trial, adding placebo or sugar water has a cure rate of 14.3%, so the drug arm has to be significantly much higher than 14.3% to be considered efficacious.
Thanks for the abstract about the synergism with TERT vaccine and checkpoint inhibitor, suggesting that a high probability of INO-5401 being synergistic and efficacious along with the Genentech or Regeneron checkpoint inhibitors in specific tumors.
Here is the abstract of the publication. The difference in date may be whether it's EPUB or print. Would be nice if INO's site has a section on publications, as there're so many now.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29084917
Like INO's vaccines, Nektar's NKTR-214 also seems to work together with checkpoint inhibitors via activation of T-cells.
https://www.investors.com/news/technology/biotech-nektar-therapeutics-stock-nears-17-year-high-on-cancer-regimen/?src=A00220&yptr=yahoo
Good for you and bravo for long term investment. Would you consider the current stock price as still low enough to buy?
For INO, focus on recent years when Dr Joseph Kim became CEO since 2009. Before were mainly different startup co. trying to get to public market using the same shell co. at different times.
The other DNA co. I referred to in last post is VICL, which indeed has been around for over 30 years. It's the pioneering co. trying to use DNA instead of protein as its product. Unfortunately, none of the human products passed the late stages. I am hoping INO would make a difference by incorporating electroporation to increase efficiency.
Chances for the 1st 2 or 3 decades were mostly done by a different DNA co. who did not use electroporation in their clinical trials, and all their products for human use failed in late stages or in phase 3. With electroporation incorporated, INO would have a much higher probability to succeed in later trials.
Yes, electroporation has been around for decades, but the specific way INO does it to greatly improve DNA uptake deserves a chance.
Effectiveness of DNA vaccines has been exponentially improved using electroporation. The hangup is a new procedure has to be approved by FDA before a pivotal clinical trial. FDA reply should be coming very soon.