RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:TH2101 They have this as the 3rd point on slide 31 but for me I think it's too early for partnering with proprietary chemos.
It's worth looking at what many companies actually do. So there are a lot of molecules in development built on trastuzumab which is an old, approved HER2 antibody. You would wonder what the commercial interest is in going after a target which already has approved drugs and lots of developing competition. I think the attraction is that it's a well known molecule, you know exactly what to expect from it, you know which patients will respond. If you're "unknown" is a new chemo, or new linker or new way to conjugate or whatever then there is a lot of benefit to proving you're unknown with a well established targeting molecule. You're going to know what an already approved antibody can deliver and once data starts rolling in you are going to know what added bonuses (if any) are coming from your tech. It simplifies the development process and potentially get's you that first approval faster.
Even with PoC there will still be very many things unknown about THTX's peptide. A really basic one will be the responder rate. You won't known how many patients you'll have to dose to get responders until thtx has dosed a good number of their own patients. The ORR could end up being 50%, it could be 10%. I don't know I'd want to be starting trials with my new chemo attached to something I don't know the responder rate of.
It's in their slide deck, nothing is ever ruled out but my view is this is only something possible once you have a lot more understanding of the peptides potential.
Of course the partnership could work in the opposite direction, thtx could go looking for new chemos and be the developer of wholely new molecules. But look what they actually did. They took pretty much the oldest molecule on the market. That's no accident, having a chemo that is so well understood helps in understanding exactly what your new tech is bringing to the process. We know for instance what the neutropenia rate is with docetaxel, when they develop their own safety data we'll have a pretty clear understanding how much SORT1+ is helping spare patients immune systems. Having that clear path to understanding the safety benefits of the new drug comes from the decision to pair it with an old chemo. I think there are good reasons for thtx pairing their unknown peptide with a very well established chemo, I think other companies will mostly want to do exactly the same thing when taking their unknown techs and chemos and looking for targeting molecules. This seems like something way down the road.
Wino115 wrote:
Absolutely, and I think in this case 1+1=5. The POC would get the interest of other producers with newer toxins or immunotherapy drugs that want a vastly superior delivery mechanism for their drug in advanced cases with high Sortilin. If there is some additional benefits to interacting with Sortilin as THYX says with VM and mestaticism, then even better.
Trodelvy targets TROP1 or 2. I like the fact they are moving beyond the old line toxins and looking at some newer ones. SN38 is a fairly new discovery. I bet we hear about an immunotherapy drug and a TKI in 2022.
jfm1330 wrote: I forgot this was the cytotoxic agent in the Immunomedic ADC, even though I saw it was very potent. Now, as the codename suggests, they have this molecule since January of this year, so they likely already have some animal data with it. Now, if Thera can come with a clear proof of concept with TH1902, the then they come out with spectacular animal data with with TH2101. 1+1=2. It would really strongly push forward the idea that they have a platform able to generate multiple PDCs aiming at an extraordinary target which is sortilin. Some PDCs that will likely be better than TH1902, also, down the road, PDCs that could be used in combo therapies. That's why the proof of concept is so important.
Wino115 wrote: This would also really help but parameters around the program and and u Delhi get possible valuation metric. Certainly narrows that unknown future value that we and the market don't quite have a handle on now. Putting that comp up there makes it really easy for analysts to justify rather large values.
Wino115 wrote:
This is strategically very ballsy! I haven't been able to read the new deck, but this is potentially huge. The reason? That cytotoxic is what is on the ADC Immunomedics created that was bought by Gilead for $21bil. And we know its name -Trodelvy. This would be the Trodelvy killer!
So the industry and FDA gushed over the Trodelvy science for mTNBC and it was approved after a brief P3 reading backed up the P2 data. But the toxin escapes and ends up in the digestive tract causing bad nausea and diarrhea. I believe the FDA sent back some of their early science trials because of that. So if this concentrates the drug in the tumor better with less effllux and better safety, it will crush Trodelvy. Absolutely kill it on day 1. Gilead needs $5bil+ annual revenue to justify their $21bil price tag. No way if this works.
This would prove up the entire platform for THTX and get AApproval for each program. So what do you pay for a platform that works on way more than one cancer type and with many CYTO toxins? Far more than $21bil in my book and I hope the BOD knows that!
jfm1330 wrote: On new information in the updated corporate presentation is the identity of a new PDC made out of TH19P01. It was given the codename TH2101, which likely mean it was the first research molecule made by Thera in 2021, jusy my guess. That being said, they also revealed with is the cytotoxic drud that is attached to TH19P01, and it is a molecule called SN38, which is the active metabolite of a drug called Irinotecan. This is a topoisomerase I inhibitor and it is 1000 times more active than irinotecan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN-38