Company: INMB
Filing Date: 2025-10-30
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001213900-25-104141
Chunk: 32

Company: Inmune Bio, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-10-30
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 1
Chunk 32
---
 the p-value of 0.16 fell short of the <0.1 target. For neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI), the enriched population
showed a stronger beneficial effect compared to the overall population, with an effect size of -0.23 and a p-value of 0.2. There was no
effect on CDR-SB, which measures cognition and function (lower scores are better). Within the dose compliant group of patients, there
was an increased benefit seen corresponding to the amount of XPro received during the trial (Figure 3b). We also evaluated the effect
size of additional endpoints (Figure 4). Across most endpoints, XPro showed favorable trends, with effect sizes approaching the
0.2 threshold for clinical relevance.

20

Figure 3a: Phase 2 Study Results – Enriched population primary
and key secondary endpoints, change from baseline

Figure 3: The enriched population show
effect size >0.2 favoring XPro1595 on the EMACC and NPI. , A higher EMACC score =better, A lower CDR and NPI score is better. EMACC:
LS Mean Diff (SE): 0.086 (0.0603), 90% CI: -0.0146, 0.1857, p-value: 0.1594. CDR-SB: LS Mean Diff (SE): -0.08 (0.307), 90% CI: -0.593,
0.426, p-value: 0.7859. NPI: LS Mean Diff (SE): -1.6 (1.25), 90% CI: -3.71, 0.47, p-value: 0.2003

Figure 3b: Phase 2 Study Results – XPro had greater impact
on dose compliant patients

21

Figure 4: Effect size of XPro across multiple endpoints described
as absolute effect sizes (cohen’s D).

Demographics

22

Safety

    Safety:
    Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs): Safety Analyses Set
  
    Event, n (%)
    Placebo (n=67)
    XPro1595 (n=139)
    Total 
(n=206)
  
    Any TEAE 
    59 (88.1%)
    131 (94.2%)
    190 (92.2%)

    Any TEAE by Maximum Severity
    Mild