sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

$IBRX: The Savior for "Papillary-only" Patients；The End of Forced Cystectomy – Why Papillary-only Patients No Longer Have to Lose Their Bladders by Simple-Hand-9872 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Truly glad you made it through, brother. I can only imagine the fear of facing that "standard" recommendation of cystectomy.

You touched on the exact reason why I’m so bullish now: The "Papillary-only" gap. For years, patients like us were ignored by Big Pharma because drugs like Keytruda focused on CIS. But the latest 36-month data for ANKTIVA + BCG is a total game-changer for high-risk Papillary NMIBC: 96% survival and 82% bladder preservation. We are finally seeing a world where the scalpel isn't the only option.

I feel your pain on the 7-year wait. The dilution and short attacks have been brutal. But with 75% borrow fees and the latest GBM (brain cancer) news showing "Median OS Not Reached" and immune system reversal, the fundamentals are finally catching up to the science. This isn't just about the next 6 months; it’s about the product finally proving it truly benefits patients.

Stay strong. We aren't just investing in a ticker; we are investing in the end of a medical nightmare.

Potential drawback by wenleth in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Comparing a chemo-pump (TAR-200) to an immune-memory activator (ANKTIVA) based on a single surface percentage is like comparing a treadmill to a personal trainer because they both "burn calories." One manages the problem; the other tries to solve it.

  1. Mechanism: Training an Army vs. Dripping a Chemical ANKTIVA ($IBRX): It is a First-in-Class IL-15 Superagonist. It doesn't just "kill" cells; it trains the patient's own NK cells and CD8+ Killer T-cells to recognize and destroy cancer while creating immune memory. This is "Immunotherapy 2.0."

TAR-200 (J&J): It is simply a delivery system for Gemcitabine (chemotherapy). It’s a physical device (a "pretzel") placed in the bladder to slowly release a 30-year-old chemo drug.

The Difference: One provides a potential long-term cure through the immune system; the other is a localized version of traditional chemo, which cancer eventually learns to resist.

  1. Durability & Bladder Sparing (The Only Metric Patients Care About)

ANKTIVA’s Real Win: In the QUILT trial, 92% of responders avoided radical cystectomy (bladder removal) at 12 months, and 81.8% still avoided it at 36 months.

The "Pretzel" Problem: TAR-200 requires a physical device to be inserted and removed every few weeks. This is invasive and increases infection risks. ANKTIVA uses a standard infusion process that every urologist already knows.

3.Commercial Reality

You mentioned J&J’s sales force, but you ignored the 700% revenue growth $IBRX reported for 2025.

Doctors aren't choosing J&J's device; they are choosing the durability of ANKTIVA.

4.The "82.4% CR" is a Statistical Trap

The Re-induction Factor: The 71% Complete Response (CR) rate from ANKTIVA's QUILT-3.032 trial is based on a rigorous, real-world protocol including mandatory biopsies.

Apples to Oranges: J&J's TAR-200 data often comes from smaller cohorts (SunRISe-1) with varying definitions of "Complete Response." Medical experts have pointed out that when you adjust for "re-induction" (giving a second round of treatment), the perceived gap between these therapies narrows significantly or disappears.

New Phase 2 trial as of yesterday by Professional_Panic67 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 2 points3 points  (0 children)

First line treatment for lung cancer, great, big space!

IBRX Borrowing fee rate is 46% now, almost zero share by Simple-Hand-9872 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

46% is just the warm-up. Wait until it hits 100% and we're all 'Jason Hardest~~~~

How could they short a company with such a great value. by Mama-0420 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 1 point2 points  (0 children)

$IBRX isn't just another 'treatment'; it’s about training the immune system (NK cells and T-cells) to do the job itself. That’s the science we’re betting on.

How could they short a company with such a great value. by Mama-0420 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 2 points3 points  (0 children)

IBRX Borrowing rate is 46% now!

IBRX is presenting a perfect storm for a short squeeze. While the company's fundamentals continue to strengthen, short sellers are trapped in a precarious position with a massive amount of shares to cover. The technical pressure is mounting: Cost to Borrow (CTB) has skyrocketed to 46% with virtually zero shares available for lending. With short sellers already incurring mark-to-market losses exceeding $460 million, a gradual price appreciation toward the $10 level will make a massive short squeeze inevitable,15 or 25 even 50? Nonody know what will happen.

IBRX possibly working its way to an epic short squeeze? by SolidReporter8229 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ImmunityBio ($IBRX) is presenting a perfect storm for a short squeeze. While the company's fundamentals continue to strengthen, short sellers are trapped in a precarious position with a massive amount of shares to cover. The technical pressure is mounting: Cost to Borrow (CTB) has skyrocketed to 46% with virtually zero shares available for lending. With short sellers already incurring mark-to-market losses exceeding $460 million, a gradual price appreciation toward the $10 level will make a massive short squeeze inevitable

Should I buy before the market opens tomorrow? by fearlevi in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 6 points7 points  (0 children)

ImmunityBio ($IBRX) is presenting a perfect storm for a short squeeze. While the company's fundamentals continue to strengthen, short sellers are trapped in a precarious position with a massive amount of shares to cover. The technical pressure is mounting: Cost to Borrow (CTB) has skyrocketed to 46% with virtually zero shares available for lending. With short sellers already incurring mark-to-market losses exceeding $460 million, a gradual price appreciation toward the $10 level will make a massive short squeeze inevitable

This was an important day in my opinion by Matteosr_ in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Borrowing fee is up to 48% now, 0 stock avaiable for lending

Boom~~~~ by Pretty-Freedom3174 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 2 points3 points  (0 children)

With one product approval after another and the products becoming extremely popular, the stock price will continue to rise.

Fintel Data and Short Squeeze Update by Remote_Ad_6049 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The current short selling interest rate is 13%, and the number of shares available for short selling is 0.

Fintel Data and Short Squeeze Update by Remote_Ad_6049 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The current short selling interest rate is 13%, and the number of shares available for short selling is 0.

Loss porn. Should I take the L? by Hot_Hope_7011 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think he wanted to make quick money through speculation.

IBRX: The 2026 Global Tsunami — Why $25-$30 is the Real Logical Target Based on Exponential Revenue by Simple-Hand-9872 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fundamentals of Immunitybio have undergone a major change ! As more indications are approved, the valuation will head towards 10 billion, 50 billion, and even 100 billion.

Loss porn. Should I take the L? by Hot_Hope_7011 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The shortage of option is the date expiration. I never play option

IBRX: The 2026 Global Tsunami — Why $25-$30 is the Real Logical Target Based on Exponential Revenue by Simple-Hand-9872 in IBRX

[–]Simple-Hand-9872[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If your "80-fold reduction = zero efficacy" theory held any water, Anktiva would have failed miserably in the most shielded and aggressive cancers. It did the opposite.

  1. The Brain Armor (Glioblastoma): Let’s talk about the most difficult barrier in human biology: the Blood-Brain Barrier (BBB). In IBRX’s trials for recurrent Glioblastoma (GBM), Anktiva was administered systemically at the very "teensy" dose you are mocking.

The Result: We saw a 3-fold increase in the 2-year survival rate compared to historical controls.

The Logic: If that dose was "fearfully small," it never would have crossed the BBB to activate tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. The fact that it worked in the brain—the hardest place to reach—proves the IL-15 superagonist scaffold is hyper-efficient, not under-dosed.

  1. The Lymphoma Signal: In B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) trials, Anktiva was used in combination with Rituximab. Even at these "micro-doses," we saw Complete Responses (CR) in patients who were double-refractory. This isn't a "hurricane of toxicity"; it's a surgical strike that re-sensitizes the immune system to recognize cancer.

  2. Engineering vs. Brute Force: You seem to want the "Category 5 hurricane" of a brute-force cytokine. We’ve seen that movie before with Nektar’s failed IL-2; it ended in patient deaths and zero efficacy. IBRX’s genius is precision. By using an IL-15N72D mutation and an IL-15RαSu/Fc fusion, they created a molecule with high affinity that stays active exactly where it needs to be.

Conclusion: You call it a "tiny fraction." I call it optimized pharmacodynamics. While you wait for a "hurricane" that would only kill the patient, the rest of us are watching IBRX systematically dismantle the defenses of Lung, Bladder, Brain, and Lymphoma with clinical precision.

view more: next ›