RE:RE:Quick Summary Highly frustrated with the answer from Marsolais when asked to corrolate what we know from preclinical and what he sees in phase Ia. He totally refused to answer the question coming back again to his freaking mice results. He said it was prematured to talk about what is going on in the phase Ia. Damn, it started a year ago and he is unable just the shed a little bit of light on what is going on in humans! That's very problematic because on one hand they saturate us with preclinical results, but we don't care about further evidence on mice. We want to know if the concept works on humans, at least some cancers in some humans. It is not that hard to understand.
Also, Levesque talked about his strategic oncology meeting with his experts and talked about how they reviewed the data from phase Ia, but for us there is absolutely no data or no sense of what makes them go to phase Ib with a lot more patients. They also talk as if they saw absolutely no efficacy in phase Ia. They say efficacy will be shown in phase Ib. Also, it is my understanding that we will not have any data release from phase Ia at the end of it. All they will do is a press release to announce the initiation of phase Ib. Investors are totally left in the dark. It's either trust the company or sell your shares. The problem is that the way things went with phase Ia with the enormous delay gives no reasons to trust them about what they say for the future. They were wrong by more than 100% on the timeline of phase Ia and they gave no explainations about that, as if nothing happened.
I don't care about stock promotion out of nothing and stuff like that, you need good results to promote the stock, but where I am very frustrated is about their communication about their execution of the business plan, which includes clinical timelines. When you miss your timeline by more than 100% you should explain why, and when you decide to go to phase Ib with 70 patients, you should at least give some data to back it up or at least give a clearer sense of what is giving you confidence to move forward. To say that all goes well, take our word, we have good results on mice, is simply not enough.
This company is increasingly frustrating to follow. They manage it as if it was a private company. As shareholders we have the right to know more about what happened in phase Ia. They keep repeating stuff they got from tests on mice as if it was directly applicable to humans, like this 7.5 to 10 times higher concentration of docetaxel with TH1902. They talked many times about that as if it was directly applicable to humans. Maybe they know why, but us shareholders we don't. If it is directly applicable, than they should have efficacy on some patients with 10 times the concentration of docetaxel in their cancer cells. The problem is that at the same time they talk like they dont see any efficacy in phase Ia. This is ridiculous, evey time they talk, you end up more confused because they are hiding what they know. They do not need to disclose the full data set, but they should disclose enough that we, shareholders, can have a clearer sense of what is going on and why it was so awfully slow in phase Ia and why despite that they are still confident enough to enroll 70 patients in phase Ib. Also, it took the 14 months to complete a phase Ia with 12 patients, how can we be sure that it will not be as slow with 70 patients. That's stuff a long time shareholder would want to know. At this point, they disclosed absolutely nothing hinting at a proof of concept. The play written by Marsolais up to this point is titled: Of mice and more mice. Nude mice, syngeneic mice, but nothing on men.