IBRX Says ANKTIVA Delivers Up To $314K Cost Advantage Over J&J's TAR-200 — Everything To Know About ImmunityBio’s Findings

ImmunityBio presented its findings for ANKTIVA plus Bacillus Calmette-Guérin at the ISPOR 2026 conference.
In this photo illustration, the ImmunityBio logo is displayed on the screen of a tablet. (Photo Illustration by Sheldon Cooper/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
In this photo illustration, the ImmunityBio logo is displayed on the screen of a tablet. (Photo Illustration by Sheldon Cooper/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Profile Image
Rounak Jain·Stocktwits
Published May 22, 2026   |   8:27 AM EDT
Share
·
Add us onAdd us on Google
Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...
  • ImmunityBio’s findings showed that ANKTIVA plus BCG generated savings of up to $151,438 per cystectomy avoided over a three-year period in a U.S. Medicare population.
  • The analysis also found lower costs per cystectomy-free month compared with TAR-200.
  • The company stated that the projected savings were driven by lower drug acquisition and administration costs, as well as higher modeled complete response rates for ANKTIVA plus BCG versus TAR-200.

ImmunityBio Inc. (IBRX) announced on Friday that a new health economic analysis found its bladder cancer therapy resulted in up to $313,775 lower cost per complete responder than Johnson & Johnson's (JNJ) TAR-200 in patients with BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC).

ImmunityBio presented its findings for ANKTIVA plus Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) at the ISPOR 2026 conference.

Read Next
Loading...
Loading...

ImmunityBio shares were up nearly 0.3% in Friday’s pre-market trade.

What Did IBRX’s Findings Show?

ImmunityBio’s findings showed that ANKTIVA plus BCG generated savings of up to $151,438 per cystectomy avoided over a three-year period in a U.S. Medicare population. The analysis also found lower costs per cystectomy-free month compared with TAR-200.

The company stated that the projected savings were driven by lower drug acquisition and administration costs, as well as higher modeled complete response rates for ANKTIVA plus BCG versus TAR-200.

“These results solidify the potential value of ANKTIVA plus BCG in delivering durable responses while reducing costs to the Medicare healthcare system,” said ImmunityBio founder Patrick Soon-Shiong.

The findings were derived from a cost-consequence model that used data from ImmunityBio's QUILT-3.032 study and TAR-200's SunRISe-1 trial.

How IBRX's ANKTIVA Compares To TAR-200

Both ANKTIVA and TAR-200 are bladder-sparing treatment options for patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. This is a population that has historically faced limited alternatives to radical cystectomy, or surgical bladder removal.

In its latest analysis, ImmunityBio said ANKTIVA plus BCG delivered a higher modeled complete response rate than TAR-200, at 49.6% versus 45.9%, while also generating lower treatment and administration costs. The company attributed the cost savings to both clinical outcomes and lower overall healthcare expenditures.

However, the comparison was based on an indirect analysis of separate clinical trials rather than a head-to-head study. Although Johnson & Johnson’s TAR-200 remains one of ANKTIVA's key competitors in the NMIBC market, direct comparative data between the two therapies is not currently available.

How Did Retail Investors React To IBRX?

Retail sentiment on Stocktwits around ImmunityBio trended in the ‘bullish’ territory, with message volumes at ‘high’ levels at the time of writing.

IBRX stock is up 291% year-to-date and 192% over the past 12 months. The S&P Biotech ETF (XBI) is up 67% during this period, while the iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is up 39%.

Also See: Kevin Warsh Will Be Sworn-In As Fed Chair Today — But The Bond Markets Aren't Giving Him A Grand Welcome

For updates and corrections, email newsroom[at]stocktwits[dot]com.

Follow on Google News
Read about our editorial guidelines and ethics policy