RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Valuations - compare T
https://www.thallion.com/docs/publications/18.2007-DrugDiscovery-Dev-updated.pdf
TLN 4601 kills cancerous cells. In labs, they exposed cancerous cells with the substance and see if it is still alive after a certain period. It's killing potential is not a problem. Lab results are quite consistent on that base.
You have to factor in other mecanism that will dilute the potentcy of the drug.
If the drug can't get to the affected area, it's not efficacious. If the body somehow (liver or other organs; blood brain barrier) blocks the drug, you have a problem.
If the body cannot eliminate the drug or the drug accumulates itself in unwanted area you have toxicity and side-effect.
Killing sick cells without hurting healthy cells is a contradiction in nature. Cancer cells are not foreign agent such as bacteria or viruses, they are human cells.
Now the scientific poster shows that the drug crosses blood brain barrier.
Also, it accumulated 200 times more in brain cancer cells than normal brain cells.
The drug is quickly elimated from the body.
Phase I/II trials has established no toxicity and no side-effect permitting maximum dosage level.
Bottom line, it gets where it is supposed to. It is eliminated quickly and the only cells being damaged by the drug is cells exhibiting over expression of PBR expression (ie cancerous cells).
For most drug, the main concern is efficacy not toxicity. That's why most trial end in failure in either PII or PIII; not efficacious at all (PII) or efficacious but unable to get statistical significance (PIII).
It is actually the reverse problem for anti-cancer drug, toxicity is the main hurdle but not efficacy.
The market is valuating the drug in a reverse fashion, thinking that efficacy will be a main concern. Toxicity was the main hurdle. 4601 and 232 passed the test handsomely by achieving no side effect and maximum dosage.
Remember 6/7 patients with various cancer type responded favorably for 4601.
and 31% of 232 get positive response (232 trial got interrupted because of a dispute with a licensor but still achieved significance).
If the were more sophisticated investors in the market, it would have price in a better market cap for TLN.
Knowing that toxicity is not a concern, efficacy is much less hard to achieve.