RE:RE:Marsolais The KOL calls I've listened to typically come once the doctor has had experience with the drug as part of the trial and compares that experience with pre-existing drugs. We had Shah on video discuss the potential of the drug, there's a limit to that until they actually treat patients and have some data. If you were to call on doctors time I'd wait until they had something substantial to say.
Wino115 wrote: To add to this, I've been listening to a whole bunch of broker KOL calls and reading their transcripts. I think the one element KOLs add is objectivity, along with additional clinical depth. A very useful session would be to have one or two practicing oncology doctors in, one from a research hospital and one from an average practicing cancer center, to have a discussion around what therapies they use now, where something like TH1902 could fit in if efficacious, a comp of Th1902 versus current standard of care, possible places they wouldn't use it, etc... That would really lay out some possible facts like that they will have a much easier time in average oncology centers for acceptance since they primarily use simpler standard of care and just follow the "procedures" and don't really use the new-fangled, new-science drugs (I don't put TH1902 in there because the toxin is standard and well-known to them). Usually those new-fangled drugs only penetrate research centers for the first 5 years or so and sometimes, depending on the drug, never really make it much beyond that. TH1902 has the opportunity to play in both channels if safety is much higher, it's efficacious, and it's for more than just the "unmet need".
FYI -- a request has been sent. We'll see what comes of it.
SPCEO1 wrote: As the company seeks to rebuild their brand with investors, they would be wise to lean heavily on Christian Marsolais. Paul normally does an excellent job himself but Christian brings even more scientific credibility to any presentation he is involved with. Having frequent cancer and NASH focused conference calls (outside of the quarterly calls) lead by Christian would make a lot of sense as that is where investors should be focusing anyway, there is lots to discuss about the progress of those programs and because Christian does a very good job describing the situation for both scientifically oriented people and the rest of us. He can discuss the status of the trials, recent research literature and its impact on NASH and cancer and answer any questions coming from folks like us.
If they don't have a monthly science update call like this with Christian this year, they are making another mistake on the investor relations front.