$XBI $IBB $BBC 2014-2025 All 8 Billion public biotech M&A transactions charted (UPDATED)

XENE IMVT DNTH

$SPRB Doing decent in the bio blood bath so far.

This applies to many niche skills. I didn’t learn astrophotography from school, I learned it by getting my hands dirty & spent every night learning how NOT to do it. If you want to do something, just start doing it. Waiting for someone to teach you might leave you with nothing.

🤔I wonder if they will do a PIPE asset acquisition play here.

Word on the street is that $TENX powered the trial with deer hunters.

$CELC hard to believe we get these sell signals for free

🤔

ceo of xbi called he said it’s not looking good

$ABVX it's all priced in

$nxtc i will say more later but I would be paying very close attention to heme tox. we can note the 5.6mpk and 7.2mpk groups doing "better" but with much shorter data sets since they were added later my whole thing with this drug was that it is hitting CDH6, and CDH6 is very highly and consistently expressed on platelets. the defining feature of this ADC vs others is that they report it has a higher affinity than counter parts like DS6000 and CUSP6 with likely a weaker payload than the cusp molecule and maybe similar to DXd. higher affinity antibody means longer residence time on cell, means higher internalization in cell, and that means nuking platelets more often than other antibodies. the flip side here was that they were probably hoping to get more activity against the target cancer cells and CDH6 low phenotypes- and that's probably true while being less reliant on a heavy hitting payload like the cusp molecule which has big bystander effects with t1000 exatecan. but the therapeutic window is very tight. this explains their choice of moving forward with 5.6, 6.4 and 7.2mpk cohorts and leaving the 7.2, 8.0 and 9.6 groups entirely despite spending a ton of their patient capital on those higher doses. they wanted to dose higher but tox is clearly stopping them. what's really concerning is the 4.8mpk group showing pretty big huge G3 AEs on efficacy it's pretty good at 52.9% on dose 4.8-8.0mpk but we're not sure on confirmed/ unconfirmed (they make no mention of which are which). the 4.8 and 6.4 do seem to be doing real work if patients can tolerate the regimen. this is a big ORR in this indication and in this patient population. but overall, personally, i am worried about tox. you can dose higher and put up bigger ORRs but I'm not so sure clinicians will sign up their patients for this