Replies to post #201044 on Biotech Values

[skitahoe]

I do agree that IMGN created some confusion with the change in trial design, but on a positive side, they've gained sufficient information from a Phase I/II Trial to go directly to a Phase III Trial, that's a pretty strong statement of their belief in the drug.

Yes, the Phase III approach will take longer, and it will cost more; however, it will also give them a much larger target market on approval. You'll find that in the conference call.

I believe IMGN is greatly oversold based on both the confusion, but also largely on missing consensus and issuing new financial guidance saying that annual losses would be slightly greater than previously established guidance.

Like many others, I view SGEN as IMGN's closest competitor and cannot explain how SGEN's market cap can be over eight times that of SGEN. Historically IMGN has traded for half or more the market cap of SGEN, on occasion it has been higher. I'm not suggesting SGEN is over priced, but that IMGN is drastically under valued by comparison.

By late this year, if they do initiate the Phase III Trial, I believe that IMGN will end the year at new highs and perhaps reach the point where its market cap is no more than half that of SGEN's.

Gary

[vinmantoo]

Dew, yes I saw the drop in IMGN. The previous response rate using mirvetuximab was for 20 patients and at 35% represented 7 patients. From a simple calculation, with 46 patients an RR just under 30% is 13 patients (13/46 = 28.2%). Obviously it would have been better to go up but I don't think the difference is that concerning as one hardly expects 20 patients to hit the real world RR in a larger trial.

Two other posters accurately expressed the pros (skitahoe) and cons (xavierprivas) of IMGN regarding the accurately so I won't rehash them. My view is that the move is risky because IMGN is going for a bigger score at the expense of time and money. If IMGN had stuck to their previous approach, they would have had time to get a partner if the results were encouraging. Now they are rolling the dice. I need to see the breakdown of high and medium folate receptor expressing patients in the updated at ASCO.

I fully understand the drop in IMGN stock price, but decided to buy some yesterday anyway. I don't have a lot of IMGN shares even after the buy was able to increase my shares by 40% at $6.81. So why did I end adding to my small number of shares? Well, the simplistic answer is that risk is higher so the price is lower. A longer view is that I think ADCs have been given a shrift due to the rise of Immune modulators. I own more SGEN than IMGN and saw then ABBV bought another ADC company, and since I own that too I have covered the bases.

The thing from the CC that caught my eye was regarding Forward II, where IMGN is testing mirvetuximab as a combination therapy. One of those combination they are going to add is Keytruda. It seemed counterproductive to me to combine a checkpoint inhibitor with drugs that inhibit or damage proliferating cells, like say docetaxel with Abs designed to promote T cell proliferation. What you would want to combine checkpoint inhibitors with things that preferentially target tumors cells, such as ADCs or hormonal inhibitors like tamoxifen or anti-androgens. I know I am jumping the gun by a lot in this regard with IMGN. If I were smart I would wait until the first data comes in from the FORWARD II arm of mirvetuximab + Keytruda, or at least began dosing, but nobody ever accused me of being smart with my money. In my defense, I may have been feeling a bit giddy due to MDVN rising. In any event that is something worth watching for in the future in my view and jumping on if the data looks promising.