The NOL alone is worth well over $1 a share. At the least, about $1.55,
... and the compensation for hunTR?
... and compensation for some small modicum of de-risked investment created by the Ph1 evidence of key measures of efficacy and of safe dosing TCR-T as high as 60 billion cells.
... and, in light of CRSPR safety issues of concern finally starting to gain attention and prick the bubble of enthusiasm for its yet-to-be-resolved ... random cuts of the genome... for the rights to an open path to a future $125B TAM using a vector that is safe, economic (Deniger adjective) and in line with Rosenberg expectations of efficacy ... PRICELESS.
For the last time here in sharing what still is Dr. Rosenberg's current vision of the future for solid cancers -- and from the "Friends of Cancer" dais last June before an audience of oncologists, Dr. Rosenberg corrected his former esteemed colleague who was moderator and while Dr. Beldegrun (who started KITE) he was on stage -- curing metastatic cancers must be "personalized."
The vast bulk of current funding for oncology research and M&A for launching new products ... the focus is -- mABs. That is NOT what is the future in metastatic cancers. Rationale: too toxic, too narrow an impact in efficacy and, when often prescribed within an indication that requires a series of monthly injections ... too expensive.
Said a different way, you can manufacture twelve specific mABs to specifically twelve distinctly different DNA signature of driver muations within the neoantigen family, KRAS. You cannot kill all of the KRAS driver mutations using the same vial of mAB product. You need twelve different mAB vials, one for each distinct design.
Now consider how hard it was for Alaunos to find "driver only" cancer signatures. Bring in Dr. Drew's SITC abstract of cancer profiles of nine metastatic cancer patients -- he found 23 distinct neoantigens BUT only one was a driver mutation that was KRAS. The other 22 were "unique" in design and specifically found within each of those patients.
Lastly, pull up Rosenberg's slide of 195 metastatic patients and his recap of ?341? neoantigen designs ... and only ONE of the 341 was a driver mutation (highlighted in bold RED) on the slide. CUSTOM therapy, i,e, "Personalized" for "success" in metastatic cancers is not POSSIBLE with mABs and treating the 16 primary variants among the dominant HLA classifications of the human species. The cost of production to use a unique mABs just for one patient is non-sensible.
The difference between the DNA signature of healthy tissue cells against the targeted cells of the DNA signature of an mAB ... is as little as one sole nucleotide (CAGT) and as just posted in the Stanford lecture, you cause the danger of killing healthy tissue which (in Rosenberg's chosen wording) is highly "sensitive" to error in that one nucleotide. Thus, black box is in place -- not exactly the optimum way to launch a global solution to worldwide cancer-care.
I am going to take a hiatus. I accept whatever is the outcome. Due diligence in biotech demands attention to the science. I trusted that the careers of Barton, Miller and Dell would set them up to meet with and pick excellent quality of management. All the best.
Best wishes for the holidays ahead.