Today's conference call

[biopearl123]

Today's call sadly had no new information. Confirmation of MDS PIII with structure pretty much as outlined on clinical trials site. Just a bit of history, when JS took over the company seven or eight years ago the stock was selling for about 6. bp

[Ryan]

Hello Biopearl,

That historic pps is not correct. The stock was in the $2.10-2.20 range the week Dr. Scarlett took over. It dropped further about 6 months later when he announced divestiture of stem cell program. It was high of 6 the prior year well before Dr. Okarma announced he was leaving.

The call was the same in terms of company plans, as they all seem to be on track and then some with the key talent on-boarded to actually execute that plan.

What was new was the even more detailed comparison of Imet v. the Medalist trial, as Dr. Scarlett seemed keen to draw a major distinction both in the efficacy of the data from the trials, the (very extreme) distinction in the patient cohort, and the very clear delineation between patients that could be treated for each... which came up again in the Q&A, Dr. Scarlett stating he could see both drugs having a place in the market for different patient cohorts.
- Dr. Scarlett did seem upbeat (for him) on this call. Dr. Rizo is busy working (that was a hoot) but we'll hear from her soon. Meanwhile, going back to the key points on the call - Plan (Jansenn transfer, MDS trial initiation, Imet manufacturing transfer, high confidence in the results based on the very clear and very strong Phase II results) + MDS market potential... Dr. Scarlett definitely waxed more poetic on the superiority of Imet results,,, I feel like he felt he missed on the last conference and sought to spell it out... meanwhile, the Medalist trial got Plenary Session at ASH despite inferior data... as Kurt Vonnegut said it best, "so it goes".

[biopearl123]

Ryan, I stand corrected, thank you. My recollection was 6 when Dr. O left but clearly not when Dr. S arrived, you are right. Yes the call was upbeat but I didn't see much new when one considered the prior info release regarding the new hires, planned expansion etc. I do think there is a sub rosa search for the holy grail in that some combination is being sought that can capitalize on imetelstat as a pan cancer agent, much like it takes two keys to unlock a safe deposit box--we have discussed this in detail before but Scarlett is turning up the heat. We can anticipate a data update at EHA in June and maybe a late breaker to allow for collection of data to the last minute. If 25% of MDS patients have TI at 24 weeks as of last October, imagine if these continue to sustain an additional eight months to May (the late breaking deadline for EHA). We will also have more OS data in MF that will probably be presented then too. They are clearly ramping up manufacturing capabilities and plan to be sure the FDA can see high quality safety and GMP approaches. There will probably be a few high profile hires yet to come and I suspect a fledgling sales force. The discussions with key opinion leaders will lend weight to the presentations made to the FDA but also cultivate acceptance in the thought leaders within the medical community. One thing that is being clarified is the positioning of the drug as you point out as superior to luspatercept in the treatment paradigm especially if the course of the disease can be shown to be altered. Scarlett has played that card close but that's where the money is--prognosis. If iron loads drop, prognosis improves (and note the general statements about allowing the bone marrow to normalize in the Geron's general company description) then that will be a bell ringer. To date they have played up lifestyle improvements due to fewer transfusion needs but I have not seen much on symptom changes in MDS have you? That would move the needle too. Yes Medalist got the plenary session but it was after all a much bigger study and had holy PIII status. I was surprised that there was no suggestion that the PIII for IMerge might have some structural changes but the subtext might be that if the primary end point is 8 wk TI and durability are 24 weeks and beyond can be shown from the PII study, is it not possible that some provisional approval could occur if the primary end point is met before the technical end of the study? It takes eight weeks for the drug to work, now that there will be a placebo arm transfusion requirement curves will diverge early in all likelihood. Well all speculation for now but Scarletts actions speak loudly. Now they just need some money...thank you again for the correction and for your elegant contributions, keep them coming. bp