IMV Inc IMVIF

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:If the tree falls in the forest...

[qwerty22]

Do you not think that instead of that ramble if he had just said what the ORR in each of those indications was and what the thresholds were we would have known exactly what to think?

If they really did set themselves ambitious targets and reached them in two indications wouldn't it be great to share that?

I understand all they may have is ORR and they're waiting for duration etc but if ORR is beating an ambitious target let's hear exactly what that target was?

There's nothing inherently wrong with his answer, it's just well short of some solid numbers to look at. There's a nice dataset out there for MSI-H for Keytruda, 39% ORR. How exactly did the combo stack up against that.

Breakthorough wrote: The response to this question is interesting. It talks about pssible combinations and, also, uses the expresion "making a big difference" for the combination with Pembro not only in DLBCL, but also "potentially" in Blabber and MSI-H cancers: Paul Stewardson Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Just calling for Chelsea, in terms of the ovarian cancer strategy, can you give us a bit of a directional sense of how close it came to the success threshold in the basket trial? And in terms of would you consider other combinations or is this how does this relate to the monotherapy, where you can go from here in different combo possibilities? Fred Ors Thanks for your question. The basket trial, the goal of the basket trial was really to explore where the combination between healthy cell therapy and a checkpoint inhibitor, in that case, pembrolizumab or Keytruda would really make a difference. So we set up ambitious objectives in all those indications. And we are very carefully selected indications from ovarian where pembrolizumab has very limited activity to bladder in MSI-high, where there is more activity. And the idea was really to better understand where we should focus the development of the combination. So for us, the fact that it didnt meet the threshold for ovarian in a way, its not too surprising given it was one of the indication in that basket that where pembro had limited activity. And also you have to consider that PD-L1 exploration, generally speaking, in ovarian cancer is pretty low. So what it tells us, and I think Andrew highlighted that, and I did too in my introduction that we have a T-cell therapy that has a very favorable safety profile. And the number of combination we can do with this technology because we are not adding toxicity is very broad. And what you can start we are starting to conclude from the number of clinical studies weve done now is that there are indications where it can be applied as monotherapy, and there is no value adding a checkpoint inhibitor. There might be value adding another type of treatment. And there are other indications where clearly the combination of the checkpoint inhibitor and the T-cell therapy is making a big difference like the DLBCL, potentially MSI and bladder. And thats where we want to focus the combination with checkpoint inhibitors. For all the indications, well go as single agent or well combine with other cycle treatment.