Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Theratechnologies Inc T.TH

Alternate Symbol(s):  THTX

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

Comment by qwerty22on Jun 23, 2021 11:51pm
159 Views
Post# 33439775

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:I am a bit bipolar

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:I am a bit bipolar

I was an academic scientist and a biotech scientist, I love both but there is a difference. Biotech works best as a goal driven process, in academic science you can allow the science to take you where it goes. The goal here is to get 1902 across the finishing line and I don't expect they'll let any fanciful ideas distract them from that. My experience is there is still a huge amount of hard work and creativity in getting that one job done. We already have a sense of other molecules that can be added to the peptide from the preclinical work. We are going to get an insight into the broad clinical applicability from the basket trial. Together that's going to be a good indicator of the potential of the platform. If 1902 succeeeds then the whole platform increases in value. You don't need to double or triple your clinical costs by adding a 2nd or 3rd molecule in order to see massive gains. Failure is still a possibility here, limiting the impact of that failure is still an important thing to do. If 1902 turns out to be a success even in just one cancer then I don't think anybody is going to lack the imagination required to see the platform can offer a whole lot more.

I think the best ROI comes from focus on getting 1902 to approval and at the same time limiting the cost of failure.

Docetaxel might not be the best molecule but it is absolutely fit for purpose for proving out the platform.

 


jfm1330 wrote: I beg to differ. While the focus is all on establishing a clear proof of concept, docetaxel is far from the ultimate weapon against all types of cancers. It is pointless for them at this point to elaborate on the potential use of other cytotoxic agents, but if the proof of concept is clearly established, it will only be the beginning.

I made the comparison with Lutathera just after the acquisition of Katana and it is very important because the peptide approch is the key. It is a natural and very specific approach. Protein-protein, or protein-peptide interactions are the day to day basic language of biochemistry. These interaction are very specific. Small molecule is totally a different thing, it is mostly unspecific, and this is why it is leading to so many side-effects. The problem of peptide as always been its instability to enzymatic degradation, or call it its short half-life. So it is impossible to take something like TH19P01 and compare it generally to other drug candidates. The probability of success is not the same. Also, when analizing the odds of success of drug candidate, you need to take into account how good the people selecting the candidate are at making the right choice. It's like an investor picking stock to invest in. All investors selecting stocks are not equals. Some are better than other, and some are also lucky enough to get a lead about a small company that they have particular skills to understand better than other.  I think Marsolais was "lucky" enough and skilled enough with the Katana opportunity. The company was in his backyard, and he had the skills to understand its potential, and he was convinced enough by the opportunity that he was able to convinced his boss, back then, Luc Tanguay, to buy it.

So again, it is a total lack of respect for the expertise at Thera to call this acquisition a lottery ticket. I saw the potential from the get go, and a guy like Marsolais, which is much more competent than me saw it too, with much more informations available to him to make this decision. There is a difference between a lottery ticket and a very well educated guess. I don't know for sure at this point if the proof of concept will be succesful and if this program will end up as a commercial success. But even where it is now, with the FDA fast track at the preclinical stage, it is safe to say that the decision, given the price paid to buy Katana, and the relatively small amount of money invested to push the program up to where it is now, was a very good decision. It was a sound scientific decision. There was enough on the scientific side to invest what has been invested. After that, nothing is sure until it is proven through proper trials, and it is what they are doing now. But the basis of all that was much more than randomly buying a lottery ticket. I said it from day one, and that facts show that decision was part of a sound and competent process. 
 

SPCEO1 wrote:

Also, TH-1904 got hardly any mention and Christian said someting like TH-1902 is pretty much the perfect molecule for what they are attempting to do. I got the impression we will not be hearing much about next versions of TH-1902



 

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>