First look at the CEO's reputation. Next remember these are mostly phase 1-2 findings. We know how ORR/CR numbers change as you go up in phase. Do you have any qualms about a company touting 56% complete response rate across a number of tumor types. Let's look at the numbers closer. For instance when you break down where the CR's come from they mostly occurred in bladder cancer which already has a 75-95% survival rate at 5 years. The data here is impressive, I agree for this a relatively easy to treat cancer. In terms of indolent Non Hodgkins lymphoma, first it is a blood borne tumor and NOT a solid tumor. It is a slow growing cancer that often isn't even treated at the onset. The 5 year survival depending on the severity and type is in the 55-95% range.
So if you look at the pooled data they tout (56%), the bulk of the CR's are in bladder cancer with 43/55 or 78% CR rate. That leaves 26/106 CR rate of 24% for the other tumors they treated. If you throw out the blood cancer NHL, then you are left with 16/85 or 19% CR for the solid tumors. Actually impressive for some of these difficult to treat cancers but a little PR manipulation to headline a 56% CR don't you think. Agree the market liked it but it was mostly in response to a CR in ONE pancreatic patient. The overall CR for pancreatic was 1/9 or 11%, a known very cold hard to treat tumor. We shall see if these early "encouraging" results hold up.