IMUNON Announces New Immunogenicity Data from Phase 1 Clinical Trial of Its DNA Vaccine in Treatment of COVID-19
Results of IMNN-101 Proof-of-Concept study demonstrate persistent immunogenicity in trial participants and further validate PlaCCine® technology
IMNN-101 induced 2- to 4-fold increase in neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers from baseline through Week 4
IMNN-101 continues to show an acceptable safety profile
LAWRENCEVILLE, N.J., Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- IMUNON, Inc. (NASDAQ: IMNN), a clinical-stage company focused on developing non-viral DNA-mediated immunotherapy and evaluating an adaptation of the platform's potential as a next-generation vaccine, today announced new safety and immunogenicity data from ongoing analyses of results from the Company's first Phase 1 proof-of-concept clinical trial of IMNN-101, its investigational DNA plasmid vaccine based on the Company's proprietary PlaCCine® technology platform. The Phase 1 study was conducted in 24 healthy volunteers as a seasonal COVID-19 vaccine, targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB1.5 spike antigen. IMNN-101 was administered as a single dose vaccine without a booster dose in study participants who were previously vaccinated against the Omicron XBB1.5 variant. Results demonstrated that IMNN-101 is safe and well-tolerated with no serious adverse effects. IMNN-101 induced a persistent 2- to 4-fold increase in serum neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers from baseline through Week 4, further increasing NAb titers between Week 2 and Week 4. The immune response was observed against the XBB1.5 variant and many newer variants following treatment, demonstrating the IMNN-101 vaccine's cross-reactivity.
'We have strong evidence of vaccine immunogenicity based on the neutralizing antibody response against the Omicron XBB.1.5 strain in this trial, and expect partnering interest in our proof-of-concept data from the PlaCCine platform,' said Stacy Lindborg, Ph.D., president and chief executive officer of IMUNON. 'These data demonstrate that our first-in-human vaccine based on our PlaCCine platform is safe and immunogenic and is well-suited to developing vaccine candidates for protecting the population against a potential future exposure to a pathogen or controlling a rising pathogen. Given proof of immunogenicity, early indications of durability of protection, and competitive advantages in the stability of our vaccine at workable temperatures compared with available mRNA vaccines, we believe that IMNN-101 has significant potential as a superior next-generation vaccine and will seek potential partners for further development.'
The participants in the Phase 1 trial had high baseline immune characteristics presumably from prior infection and multiple previous vaccinations against COVID-19 and ongoing infection as evidenced by the rise in viral nucleocapsid antigen during the study period. Modest increases in T cell responses were observed in this setting of trial participants having received multiple immunizations prior to the study.
'Data from this trial is of high quality and show that IMUNON's DNA vaccine is immunogenic in humans. Following immunization, participants' NAb titers increased through Week 4 with a 2- to 4-fold increase from baseline, a clear and convincing response to the vaccination,' said Ai-ris Collier, M.D., Co-Director of the Clinical Trials Unit, Center for Virology and Vaccine Research Center, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
The Phase 1 clinical data of IMNN-101 is consistent with strong evidence of immunogenicity and protection for the PlaCCine platform in rodents and non-human primates, with prior preclinical results showing that protection exceeded 95% in non-human primates, which is comparable to mRNA vaccines. The robust immunogenicity profile, expected durability of protection, comparative ease of manufacturing, and stability at workable temperatures (up to one year at 4°C and one month at 37°C) suggest that our vaccine based on the PlaCCine technology platform may be a potential viable alternative to available messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines.
About PlaCCine® and IMNN-101
IMNN-101 utilizes the company's PlaCCine® technology platform, a proprietary composition of a DNA plasmid that regulates the expression of key pathogen antigens and a novel synthetic DNA delivery system. The plasmid-based expression vector accommodates single or multiple antigens through its flexible vector design, offers manufacturing flexibility compared to with viral or other DNA or protein vaccines, and the synthetic delivery system protects DNA from degradation and facilitates DNA uptake after injection with acceptable safety.
About the Phase 1 PoC Clinical Trial
This U.S. Phase 1 proof-of-concept (PoC) study inoculated 24 participants to evaluate three escalating doses of IMNN-101 with eight participants at each dose. All participants were treated at DM Clinical Research in Philadelphia. For this study, IMNN-101 has been designed to protect against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB1.5 variant, in accordance with the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee's June 2023 announcement of the framework for updated COVID-19 doses. The primary objectives of the study are to evaluate safety and tolerability in healthy adults. Secondary objectives include evaluating IMNN-101's ability to elicit neutralizing antibody responses, cellular responses and their associated durability.
About IMUNON
IMUNON is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on advancing a portfolio of innovative treatments that harness the body's natural mechanisms to generate safe, effective and durable responses across a broad array of human diseases, constituting a differentiating approach from conventional therapies. IMUNON is developing its non-viral DNA technology across its modalities. The first modality, TheraPlas®, is developed for the coding of cytokines and other therapeutic proteins in the treatment of solid tumors where an immunological approach is deemed promising. The second modality, PlaCCine®, is developed for the delivery of DNA-coded viral antigens that can elicit a strong immunological response. This technology may represent a promising platform for the development of vaccines in infectious diseases.
The Company's lead clinical program, IMNN-001, is a DNA-based immunotherapy for the localized treatment of advanced ovarian cancer currently in Phase 2 development. IMNN-001 works by instructing the body to produce safe and durable levels of powerful cancer-fighting molecules, such as interleukin-12 and interferon gamma, at the tumor site. Additionally, the Company has entered a first-in-human study of its COVID-19 booster vaccine (IMNN-101). We will continue to leverage these modalities and to advance the technological frontier of plasmid DNA to better serve patients with difficult-to-treat conditions. For more information on IMUNON, visit www.imunon.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
IMUNON wishes to inform readers that forward-looking statements in this news release are made pursuant to the 'safe harbor' provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, including, but not limited to, statements regarding the timing for commencement and potential outcome of a Phase 3 trial of IMNN-001, the timing and enrollment of the Company's clinical trials, the potential of any therapies developed by the Company to fulfill unmet medical needs, the market potential for the Company's products, if approved, the potential efficacy and safety profile of our product candidates, the potential partnering opportunities, and the Company's plans and expectatio
ns with respect to its development programs more generally, are forward-looking statements. We generally identify forward-looking statements by using words such as 'may,' 'will,' 'expect,' 'plan,' 'anticipate,' 'estimate,' 'intend' and similar expressions (as well as other words or expressions referencing future events, conditions or circumstances). Readers are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties including, without limitation, uncertainties relating to unforeseen changes in the course of research and development activities and in clinical trials, including the fact that interim results are not necessarily indicative of final results; the uncertainties of and difficulties in analyzing interim clinical data; the significant expense, time and risk of failure of conducting clinical trials; the need for IMUNON to evaluate its future development plans; possible actions by customers, suppliers, competitors or regulatory authorities; and other risks detailed from time to time in IMUNON's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. IMUNON assumes no obligation, except to the extent required by law, to update or supplement forward-looking statements that become untrue because of subsequent events, new information or otherwise.
Contacts:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
An Uproar at the NIH
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Updated at 10:26 a.m. on June 9, 2025 Since winning President Donald Trump's nomination to serve as the director of the National Institutes of Health, Jay Bhattacharya—a health economist and prominent COVID contrarian who advocated for reopening society in the early months of the pandemic—has pledged himself to a culture of dissent. 'Dissent is the very essence of science,' Bhattacharya said at his confirmation hearing in March. 'I'll foster a culture where NIH leadership will actively encourage different perspectives and create an environment where scientists, including early-career scientists and scientists that disagree with me, can express disagreement, respectfully.' Two months into his tenure at the agency, hundreds of NIH officials are taking Bhattacharya at his word. More than 300 officials, from across all of the NIH's 27 institutes and centers, have signed and sent a letter to Bhattacharya that condemns the changes that have thrown the agency into chaos in recent months—and calls on their director to reverse some of the most damaging shifts. Since January, the agency has been forced by Trump officials to fire thousands of its workers and rescind or withhold funding from thousands of research projects. Tomorrow, Bhattacharya is set to appear before a Senate appropriations subcommittee to discuss a proposed $18 billion slash to the NIH budget—about 40 percent of the agency's current allocation. The letter, titled the Bethesda Declaration (a reference to the NIH's location in Bethesda, Maryland), is modeled after the Great Barrington Declaration, an open letter published by Bhattacharya and two of his colleagues in October 2020 that criticized 'the prevailing COVID-19 policies' and argued that it was safe—even beneficial—for most people to resume life as normal. The approach that the Great Barrington Declaration laid out was, at the time, widely denounced by public-health experts, including the World Health Organization and then–NIH director Francis Collins, as dangerous and scientifically unsound. The allusion in the NIH letter, officials told me, isn't meant glibly: 'We hoped he might see himself in us as we were putting those concerns forward,' Jenna Norton, a program director at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, and one of the letter's organizers, told me. None of the NIH officials I spoke with for this story could recall another time in their agency's history when staff have spoken out so publicly against a director. But none of them could recall, either, ever seeing the NIH so aggressively jolted away from its core mission. 'It was time enough for us to speak out,' Sarah Kobrin, a branch chief at the National Cancer Institute, who has signed her name to the letter, told me. To preserve American research, government scientists—typically focused on scrutinizing and funding the projects most likely to advance the public's health—are now instead trying to persuade their agency's director to help them win a political fight with the White House. In an emailed statement, Bhattacharya said, 'The Bethesda Declaration has some fundamental misconceptions about the policy directions the NIH has taken in recent months, including the continuing support of the NIH for international collaboration. Nevertheless, respectful dissent in science is productive. We all want the NIH to succeed.' A spokesperson for HHS also defended the policies the letter critiqued, arguing that the NIH is 'working to remove ideological influence from the scientific process' and 'enhancing the transparency, rigor, and reproducibility of NIH-funded research.' The agency spends most of its nearly $48 billion budget powering science: It is the world's single-largest public funder of biomedical research. But since January, the NIH has canceled thousands of grants—originally awarded on the basis of merit—for political reasons: supporting DEI programming, having ties to universities that the administration has accused of anti-Semitism, sending resources to research initiatives in other countries, advancing scientific fields that Trump officials have deemed wasteful. Prior to 2025, grant cancellations were virtually unheard-of. But one official at the agency, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of professional repercussions, told me that staff there now spend nearly as much time terminating grants as awarding them. And the few prominent projects that the agency has since been directed to fund appear either to be geared toward confirming the administration's biases on specific health conditions, or to benefit NIH leaders. 'We're just becoming a weapon of the state,' another official, who signed their name anonymously to the letter, told me. 'They're using grants as a lever to punish institutions and academia, and to censor and stifle science.' NIH officials have tried to voice their concerns in other ways. At internal meetings, leaders of the agency's institutes and centers have questioned major grant-making policy shifts. Some prominent officials have resigned. Current and former NIH staffers have been holding weekly vigils in Bethesda, commemorating, in the words of the organizers, 'the lives and knowledge lost through NIH cuts.' (Attendees are encouraged to wear black.) But these efforts have done little to slow the torrent of changes at the agency. Ian Morgan, a postdoctoral fellow at the NIH and one of the letter's signers, told me that the NIH fellows union, which he is part of, has sent Bhattacharya repeated requests to engage in discussion since his first week at the NIH. 'All of those have been ignored,' Morgan said. By formalizing their objections and signing their names to them, officials told me, they hope that Bhattacharya will finally feel compelled to respond. (To add to the public pressure, Jeremy Berg, who led the NIH's National Institute of General Medical Sciences until 2011, is also organizing a public letter of support for the Bethesda Declaration, in partnership with Stand Up for Science, which has organized rallies in support of research.) Scientists elsewhere at HHS, which oversees the NIH, have become unusually public in defying political leadership, too. Last month, after Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—in a bizarre departure from precedent—announced on social media that he was sidestepping his own agency, the CDC, and purging COVID shots from the childhood-immunization schedule, CDC officials chose to retain the vaccines in their recommendations, under the condition of shared decision making with a health-care provider. Many signers of the Bethesda letter are hopeful that Bhattacharya, 'as a scientist, has some of the same values as us,' Benjamin Feldman, a staff scientist at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, told me. Perhaps, with his academic credentials and commitment to evidence, he'll be willing to aid in the pushback against the administration's overall attacks on science, and defend the agency's ability to power research. But other officials I spoke with weren't so optimistic. Many at the NIH now feel they work in a 'culture of fear,' Norton said. Since January, NIH officials have told me that they have been screamed at and bullied by HHS personnel pushing for policy changes; some of the NIH leaders who have been most outspoken against leadership have also been forcibly reassigned to irrelevant positions. At one point, Norton said, after she fought for a program focused on researcher diversity, some members of NIH leadership came to her office and cautioned her that they didn't want to see her on the next list of mass firings. (In conversations with me, all of the named officials I spoke with emphasized that they were speaking in their personal capacity, and not for the NIH.) Bhattacharya, who took over only two months ago, hasn't been the Trump appointee driving most of the decisions affecting the NIH—and therefore might not have the power to reverse or overrule them. HHS officials have pressured agency leadership to defy court orders, as I've reported; mass cullings of grants have been overseen by DOGE. And as much as Bhattacharya might welcome dissent, he so far seems unmoved by it. In early May, Berg emailed Bhattacharya to express alarm over the NIH's severe slowdown in grant making, and to remind him of his responsibilities as director to responsibly shepherd the funds Congress had appropriated to the agency. The next morning, according to the exchange shared with me by Berg, Bhattacharya replied saying that, 'contrary to the assertion you make in the letter,' his job was to ensure that the NIH's money would be spent on projects that advance American health, rather than 'on ideological boondoggles and on dangerous research.' And at a recent NIH town hall, Bhattacharya dismissed one staffer's concerns that the Trump administration was purging the identifying variable of gender from scientific research. (Years of evidence back its use.) He echoed, instead, the Trump talking point that 'sex is a very cleanly defined variable,' and argued that gender shouldn't be included as 'a routine question in order to make an ideological point.' The officials I spoke with had few clear plans for what to do if their letter goes unheeded by leadership. Inside the agency, most see few levers left to pull. At the town hall, Bhattacharya also endorsed the highly contentious notion that human research started the pandemic—and noted that NIH-funded science, specifically, might have been to blame. When dozens of staffers stood and left the auditorium in protest, prompting applause that interrupted Bhattacharya, he simply smiled. 'It's nice to have free speech,' he said, before carrying right on. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Yazoo County middle school teacher selected as 2025 National Stem Scholar
YAZOO COUNTY, Miss. (WJTV) – Yazoo County middle school teacher Melanie Hardy was selected for the 2025 National Stem Scholar Program. 10 scholars are chosen to study science, technology, engineering and math at Western Kentucky University for a week, as well as develop a project. 'I actually screamed and then I began texting our principal and my family to let them know because this has been a lifelong dream,' said Hardy. The middle school science and math teacher says, her project is to do a year-long study of the Mississippi River and how it has changed over time. In April 2026, she will travel to Anaheim, California to present her project at the National Science Teacher's Association Conference. This is the second time that Hardy has applied for the program. The program is open to middle school science teachers. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Downtown Greenville bar closed for renovations sets reopening date
GREENVILLE, S.C. (WSPA) – A downtown Greenville bar that was temporarily closed for renovations has announced the date for its grand reopening. City Tavern, located at 128 North Main Street, previously announced that the bar would close following St. Patrick's Day. The slushy bar posted on its Facebook page Sunday that the establishment will return on Monday, June 23. The Facebook post also mentioned a few upgrades the baby blue building received, such as a fully renovated space inside and out, a brand-new full-service lunch & dinner menu, an open-air concept with retractable doors and 11 TVs. Renovation plans were executed with assistance from the Facade Improvement Program. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
