RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Lower SP HoldingsYeah, I don't think they would know a whole lot more about anything specifically going on scientifically or from the actual trial. More about being able to tilt the field a bit on the future --so an inquiry with a KOL in an oncology setting to determine what the competition is in 4L mTNBC or the others, where would a PDC need to see it's RECIST data come in to perk up their ears, what upcoming competition is there, what are your doctors looking for, what's the competition in genetic mod oncology for these 4 cancers, how about immunotherapies, etc....? The kind of stuff that allows them a slightly better chance then anyone else in filling in their forward looking decision tree based on this developing trial. They can act ahead with those tidbits. So could we if we can figure them out, but it's above my head.
If you had an engaged sell-side analyst following you, this is exactly when they would be writing a report discussing what the trial was about, when the results may come out, what the 8 week delay could mean, a ready-reckoner on how to interpret the dose, safety and any PK/PD data, and a reminder that based on those things, it could de-risk the program significantly and make you review your price target going in to the extension trial. They sort of tee it all up for their investors and get the ball rolling. We've rolled downhill from over $4 to $3 instead since it's unfollowed.
You have to ask, since the NBF or Mackie (or whatever it's called now) analysts did mention oncology, why haven't they spoken up to clients on what to expect, what it means, etc... Not a word from them and they were paid a pretty penny not long ago. Sort of proof that no one is really actually covering them now. They risk another empty phone line for this quarter's call.
jfm1330 wrote: I agree that a fund like Soleus can consult with expert knowing more about cancer in general and on the sortilin receptor. But without more data available to them from Thera, I don't think they can understand much more. There is no very complex science involved in SORT1+ and TH1902. Thera did not identify sortilin. Their key idea was to use it as a selective entry point into cancer cells because of overexpression in many cancers, especially adavanced cancers. They were also able the create the peptide that is a good ligand to sortilin, and able to remain a good ligand while attached to two molecules of cyrotoxic drugs. That was another key, but peptide design is no rocket science either. It is just a good appilication of realtively simple science. They likely looked at natural ligands of sortilin, then made ten or hundreds of peptide sequences, tested them for affinity with sortilin under the unloaded form, than the loaded form. Then made some adjustments to the sequence if needed, chose the linkers they would use for selective cleavage into the cells, tested affinity again, and internalization tests with radiolabelled version of the peptide. After that they started preclinical work on animals with cancer xenografts with different kind of experiments to validate the concept on animals and here we are on humans. So if Soleus does not have access to more preclinical data than us or data from the actual phase Ia, there is not much they can understand that we can't. Thera is doing a phase I for a reason, to learn and validate the concept on humans. So they used relatively simple science by today's standards, but made a clever application of it, at least up to the animal model.