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 Jul 02, 2021 12:45pm
82 Views
Post# 33484849

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Fitting

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Fitting

I don't quite understand what you mean. There is no placebo in this trial. At a very simplistic level we want efficacy to come as early as possible and toxicities to come as late. But the timing of when the company goes public with these things may not follow that exactly.

From the discussion we had yesterday it seems to me they've given themselves a fairly wide timeframe in which to report. Beginning at the end of the summer and going on to the end of the year.

There are all sorts of scenarios. For example involving the FDA in discussions might delay some things but likely that involvement would be to discuss positive things, so a delay in that scenario would be a positive thing. If they don't have any DLTs during dose escalation then I think they could just stop but they might add higher doses, again a delay in getting to readout on MTD would be a good thing in this scenario. Having fairly weak efficacy signals and holding out for more drug cycles might delay things and be negative. 


The only thing from yesterday that doesn't make sense to me is the timing of MTD to the end of the year. MTD discovery is fixed to the 1st cycle of each patient enrolled in the dose escalation phase. That ends in Sept. They have MTD by Sept (unless they dose higher) so it seems ultra-conservative to hold onto that data until the end of the year. Everything else is fine, probably what matters to us is interim safety and efficacy and that appears to be scheduled for 2021.


palinc2000 wrote:

I have suffered big financial losses when a Phase 3 trial  which was scheduled to be unblinded after a certain number of eventd( deaths)went on and on  for many more months  because the patients on placebo lived a lot longer than anticipated and about the same as those on the drug,Total failure!!!
So I think we need to be careful as some pointed out to rely too much on the time frame till MTD is reached.... It seems that longer may not necessarily mean better ....Am I wrong?

 

scarlet1967 wrote:

 

The DLT is at grade 3 or above, the toxicity is graded from grade 1 to 5.

Apart from 5( lethal consequences) all other grades are reversible hence the higher grades the more need of intervention, treatment and longer recovery. At the end of each cycle patients  are reviewed for safety data so one can presume if there are any toxicity it will be detected  there and then.

The below is a repeat of what quartly posted earlier.

As for MTD at any dose  level if grade 3 toxicity is shown the MTD will be the previous lower dose. At any level

if 2 or more patients of a group of 3 show DLT the MTD will be the previous lower dose, if 2 or more patients of a group of 6 show DLT again the MTD will be the previous lower dose.

 

In May this year FDA initiated project Optimus, they try to move away from MTD as a working dose for trials due to adverse effects from high dosage.

To me the company needs to find an effective and safe dose as a working dosage going into phase 2 and beyond so although no DLT or DLT at whatever level as long as they have a good therapeutic window they might set a cut off target to make sure no one throughout the trial shows grade 3 or above toxicity.

The fact that as mentioned earlier the part1 phase 1 can take longer into fall has nothing to do with company trying to keep dosing patients with higher dosages but as many mentioned the process can take longer as there could be some back and forth in dosing depending on whether they see DLT during process.

 

This is the grading chart.

Adverse-Effects

Traditional 3+3 after the DLT is observed in first two or more cycles.
 

“1. Traditional 3+3 Design The traditional 3+3 dose-escalation design starts off by treating three patients at a conservative low dose. If no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) are observed, the trial proceeds to the next higher dose with three new patients. If one DLT is observed among the previous three patients, three more patients are treated at this dose. If no DLTs are seen among these three patients, the study moves on to the next dose. If two or more DLTs are found among the six patients, then the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) is defined as the previous dose. Likewise, if two or three out of three patients experience DLTs at any level, the previous dose becomes the MTD. This continues until an MTD is defined.”


 

qwerty22 wrote:

 

All sorts of grade 3 and beyond toxicities. Just bare in mind this is a very technical, defined process designed just to find a working dose. It's not really defining the full safety profile of the drug, that comes later, although I guess it's a pointer to that. I read this 3+3 MTD process typically leads to a situation where the drug gives grade 3+ events in 40-70% of patients in the clinic. As Scarlett discovered there is concern at the FDA this method is leading to too toxic drug doses.

 

palinc2000 wrote: At what point do they determine that MTD has been reached,,,How is toxicity defined? Is there a time factor involved,,,?Can toxicity be reversed after a a few days .....?  

 

 


 




<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>