RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Voting time soonI'm the first to admit it when I'm wrong and, yes, I've been wrong on the P1 TH1902 timeline and NASH pipeline prospects. The option value is still valid in my book, and actually would be worth more if there is POC since they've added in tumors like melanoma that are big, growing markets with limited treatments. But the fact is that we actually don't know yet if we're right or wrong on the SORT1+ platform and need to learn a lot more. No news just means that - neither positive or negative - they don't have the full picture to talk about, but they will soon and then the the bulls or the bears can crow about it. Remember the POC around sort1 and the peptide is the most valuable aspect. The annual already said they're focusing on S38 in the lab now for the next round of studies, so they're thinking beyond just taxol.
The problem as I see it is that they haven't articulated the possible ways their PDC could be used in some of these cancers. We've also forgotten some of the early discussions. All of this depends on sort1 being a valid and prospective target and the peptide attaching and internalizing. But the early idea was if more of the drug gets in safely, you can use this in completely different ways (that "new paradigm" talk from Belevieu and Marsolais). You don't necessarily need huge doses if it doesn't lead to major safety issues. Some of the latest trials you see they dosed in vivo at small levels and did it weekly, and it blew away taxol on a like-for-like basis in both duration of response and tumor regression. I don't know of any chemos that are given at low doses at high frequency (I'm sure there may be some), but that may be fairly unique and useful. Further, if the whole VM, stem cell argument they are now making (with the TNBC, Ovarian study) shows in humans, then you're talking a completely unique approach that you may just add in to any solid tumor regimine at any stage simply to stop the stem cells from promoting tumor growth and spreading further afield.
I would hope if we see POC and 1b shows some efficacy, that they (and new IR) realizes they can talk about the platform in a much more expansive and clinically practical way that would lead investors to the value proposition. While a high dose is great, it's the fact you can go from 50mg weekly to 300mg tri-weekly that could be the game-changer. And maybe in some cancers with larger sortilin and tumor burden (like JFM states), you can go up to 360 or 400mg. They just need to show the possibilities are enormous...IF there is a POC around sort1. As everyone here has stated, investors live by breathing valuable possibilites in the future and once they have clearer signals they are getting there, they need to now rethink how they talk about the whole sort1 platform and bring back in some of the discussion they had early on. I think any decent oncology analyst would understand that and could run with that idea and differentiate the potential with THTX versus some of these other names we see.
Long way of saying, we don't know if we're right or wrong, but will once they finish 1b.
Biobob wrote: It's a fact we've been wrong big time and that nobody beleives the story except Soleus for now. As long as they beleive in it we can be hopeful that something good happens with th1902. In my book they are much more knowlageble than any of the 3 analyst following the stock now or anyone on the retail side. I will wait for the AACR on April 11th before voting. If nothing occurs I don't want them to get a free pass and do another OO after the AGM to finance their projects.