Company: INMB
Filing Date: 2025-08-07
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001213900-25-073077
Chunk: 69

Company: Inmune Bio, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-08-07
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 2
Chunk 69
---
, which measures cognition (higher scores are better), showed an effect size of 0.27, exceeding the company’s
threshold of 0.2, though 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). 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.

21

Figure 3: 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 4: Phase 2 Study Results – Most endpoints favor treatment
with XPro1595.

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

22

Demographics 

23

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