Theratechnologies Inc T.TH

Alternate Symbol(s): THTX

Healthcare Biotechnology

Theratechnologies Inc. is a Canada-based clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company. The Company is focused on the development and commercialization of therapies addressing unmet medical needs. It markets prescription products for people with human immunodeficiency viruses (HIV) in the United States. The Company's research pipeline focuses on specialized therapies addressing unmet medical needs in HIV, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and oncology. Its medicines include Trogarzo and EGRIFTA SV (tesamorelin for injection). Trogarzo (ibalizumab-uiyk) injection is a long-acting monoclonal antibody which binds to domain 2 of the CD4 T cell receptors. EGRIFTA SV (tesamorelin for injection) is approved in the United States for the reduction of excess abdominal fat in people with HIV who have lipodystrophy. Its portfolio includes Phase I clinical trial of sudocetaxel zendusortide (TH1902), a novel peptide-drug conjugate (PDC), in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

TSX:TH - Post by User

Theratechnologies Inc > News release

<< Previous

Bullboard Posts

Next >>

Comment by palinc2000on Apr 10, 2021 3:50pm

103 Views

Post# 32973128

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:News release

I think what is new in the PR are the added words like ''sustained" and and "persisted longer"
I dont believe that was known to us before.

Wino115 wrote: Yes the melanoma is a pleasant surprise thay had hinted at. From what I can find the treatment market will be worth around $9bil in 2023 and there's 150,000 new cases a year. Not sure how many make it to the refractory metastic category though. But just from anecdotal reading it certainly is a cancer that's growing more prevalent. Maybe part of global warming, more people stay outside and get sun rays.

But a back of the envelope calculation if we assume 10% annually don't have success with treatment it would be another $1bil market with 10-15,000 new cases a year and growth 11% annually. With no treatment options, that would be nice.

qwerty22 wrote:
I think everything you say is true except the sortilin part, I might be wrong. I don't see anywhere where it says patients will be tested for sortilin, even for part 2. Where are you getting that from?

What makes sense to me is they take anybody, or anybody with the right indication in part 2. And any patients that have available tumour material they will screen that as part of the post-hoc analysis. I don't see anywhere where they've said there'll be a sortilin pre-screen.

juniper88 wrote: The first part is for all comers with solid tumors and recurrent or refractory disease. And the patient is supposed to be out of treatment options. The patients will be tested for sortilin but it doesn't have to be expressed high for a patient to go on the trial. The type of cancer doesn't matter to go on the trial. For the second part, from what I understood, patients will need to have high sortilin receptor expression. And the patient will need to fit in one of the cancer types.

qwerty22 wrote:
As well as these examples I've found there are others that have done what THTX have done and just rely on publication at the AACR website, maybe it's not that clear that companies can also 'self publish' their own posters. Somebody should point that out.

I'm excited about melanoma. Seem the unmet medical need in metastatic melanoma is massive. Success rates in primary melanoma can be as high as 99% (if surgery is successful, but once it has spread it drops to 10%. I'm also reading that things like VM might be important to the aggressiveness.

There seems to be some confusion about the trial study. The way I read it the part 1 dose escalation seems to be any 'untreatable' solid tumour, that's why the first patient has prostate cancer. It's only part 2 when they focus on the 5 indications. So I guess theoretically they might pick up a melanoma case in part 1.

Wino115 wrote: Right- I don't get that, especially as the Province of Quebec helped pay for some of this. They have to release these eposters like the other companies are doing. That's ridiculous.

Just reading their release, we see continued and sustained safety vs. Dox at those dose levels they mention (I'm not actually sure what those doses mean). Melanona is clearly in the sights of SORT1+ and we should add that in.

The one that really stands out to me is that they got a response for colorectal where docetaxol is not even used because it's ineffective. That means to me the drug is clearly getting to the right cells in that cancer. Then again, we need the human data for all of it but it sure sounds solid pre-clinical.

Would like to see those posters. AACR doesn't own them, THTX does --- Leah?

qwerty22 wrote:
or this which has 5 posters from a company.

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/04/10/2207770/0/en/NuCana-Announces-Five-Poster-Presentations-at-the-American-Association-for-Cancer-Research-AACR-Annual-Meeting-2021.html

qwerty22 wrote:

Seems like it is behind a paywall, but then I'm finding other companies are putting their posters on their own websites like this for example.

https://ultimovacs.com/content/2021/04/AACR_INITIUM_STUDY-IN-PROGRESS_ABSTRACT.pdf

palinc2000 wrote: What is exactly the new data?