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

Theralase Technologies Inc. V.TLT

Alternate Symbol(s):  TLTFF

Theralase Technologies Inc. is a Canada-based clinical-stage pharmaceutical company. The Company is engaged in the research and development of light activated compounds and their associated drug formulations. The Company operates through two divisions: Anti-Cancer Therapy (ACT) and Cool Laser Therapy (CLT). The Anti-Cancer Therapy division develops patented, and patent pending drugs, called Photo Dynamic Compounds (PDCs) and activates them with patent pending laser technology to destroy specifically targeted cancers, bacteria and viruses. The CLT division is responsible for the Company’s medical laser business. The Cool Laser Therapy division designs, develops, manufactures and markets super-pulsed laser technology indicated for the healing of chronic knee pain. The technology has been used off-label for healing numerous nerve, muscle and joint conditions. The Company develops products both internally and using the assistance of specialist external resources.


TSXV:TLT - Post by User

Comment by Eoganachton Apr 02, 2022 7:31pm
663 Views
Post# 34570580

RE:RE:New List of Competition from UroToday

RE:RE:New List of Competition from UroTodayGood points CancerSlayer. Thanks for coming out of retirement :)
CancerSlayer wrote:
Eoganacht wrote: This recent article from UroToday (01 April) reveals that the 2 year CR rate for N-803 is around 36%:

"In Cohort A, complete response was noted in 59 of 83 (71%) at the primary endpoint designated 3- or 6-month time point.  Impressively, more than half (52%) had durable response out to 2 years or beyond."

52% of 59 = 30 out of 83 patients = 36%

This jives with Immunity Bio's announcement of their results in February:

"Indeed, the benchmark of 30% durable response at 18 to 24 months for a clinically meaningful therapy “is likely too high and may not be realistically achievable,”3 according to recommendations published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. This “realistically unachievable” endpoint of 30% durable response at 18 months has in fact now been achieved and exceeded with the combination of Anktiva and BCG in this trial reported today. "

According to the list at the bottom of the following article TLD1433 is one of 14 trials currently going on in this space.


Pembrolizumab and Beyond for BCG-Unresponsive, High-Risk, Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Published 01 April 2022
 
It has now been over a year since pembrolizumab received FDA approval on January 8, 2020, for treatment for Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG)-unresponsive, high-risk, non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with carcinoma in situ (CIS) with or without papillary tumors who are ineligible for or who have elected to not undergo radical cystectomy.  This approval was a nice step towards expanding treatment options for a patient population that harbors a clear unmet medical need. Intravesical BCG is the standard for intermediate and high-risk disease, but BCG is not adequate to prevent relapses or frank resistance in approximately 50% of patients.1  BCG-unresponsive disease includes both BCG-refractory and BCG-relapse populations.  BCG-refractory refers to the presence of persistent high-grade cancer 6 months after the start of induction therapy or cancers that have progressed by either stage or grade 3 months after the initiation of induction therapy.2
 
BCG-relapse refers to patients with recurrence after achieving a ≥ 6-month disease-free interval after treatment.2  The standard of care for these patients generally remains radical cystectomy, but many patients are not fit enough and/or have a strong desire to retain their bladders.  Intravesical valrubicin is a previously regulatory approved option for BCG-refractory carcinoma-in-situ and for those who do not find cystectomy to be a suitable option.  However, valrubicin only offers a 12-month disease-free rate of 16%.2  Therefore, pembrolizumab is a welcome new addition to the arsenal.
 
The efficacy of pembrolizumab for BCG-unresponsive disease was established in the KEYNOTE-057 (NCT02625961) clinical trial.3  This was a multicenter, single-arm, 101 patient trial with high-risk NMIBC.  Ninety-six of the patients had CIS with or without papillary tumors.  Treatment with pembrolizumab 200 mg IV q3weeks continued until persistent or progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or 24 months without disease progression.  The primary endpoint was complete response, defined by negative cystoscopic evaluations, urine cytology, and CT imaging.  The complete response rate was 41% (95% CI: 31, 51%) and median response duration was 16.2 months.  Toxicity was as expected from previous trials with pembrolizumab. 
 
More recently, at the 2022 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium, the phase II/III QUILT 3.032 trial of the IL-15RalphaFc superagonist N-803 was presented.4  N-803 was combined with BCG for patients already with BCG-unresponsive non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.  N-803 serves to drive proliferation and activation of NK and T cells, without binding to T regulatory cells.  In combination with BCG, N-803 previously showed complete response in 9 of 9 subjects in a phase 1 trial.5  The 2022 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium presentation was focused on the presentation of two separate cohorts of data.  This included Cohort A patients, who had persistent or recurrent CIS +/- recurrent Ta/T1 disease within 12 months of receiving adequate BCG and Cohort B patients, with recurrent high-grade Ta/T1 disease, without CIS, within 6 months of completing adequate BCG.  Treatment was administered as intravesical BCG 50 mg plus intravesical N-803 400 ug weekly X6 induction or reinduction X 6 plus maintenance for up to 3 years.  In Cohort A, complete response was noted in 59 of 83 (71%) at the primary endpoint designated 3- or 6-month time point.  Impressively, more than half (52%) had durable response out to 2 years or beyond.  In Cohort B, the papillary tumor group only, the primary endpoint of being disease-free at 12 months was achieved in 57% of the 77 patients enrolled.  At 2 years, the disease-free survival rate was still 48%.  Adverse events were minimal in grades 1-2, most commonly being dysuria (22%), pollakiuria (19%), and hematuria (18%).  The above results are quite impressive, leaving the promise that we may eventually have another option for patients with BCG-unresponsive non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.
 
The FDA approval of pembrolizumab for this unmet disease state represents a significant advancement in the field and increased options for our patients.  However, close dissection of the data reveals that the sustained pathologic T0 rate without any recurrence at one year approximates a little less than 18%.  Recognizing that fact puts things into perspective.  It emphasizes our need to persist in developing additional treatment options for patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC.  In July 2018, I presented an article summarizing the ongoing immuno-oncology trials for these patients, but of course, there are many new trial options now.6  The recent 2022 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium presentation of the QUILT 3.032 trial with N-803 combined with BCG is just one promising example.
 
Below, I present other ongoing trials for BCG-unresponsive non-muscle invasive bladder cancer that we should continue to accrue aggressively to.  Given the fact that this is a significantly large, unmet need population, with limited treatment options if radical cystectomy is not feasible or desired, the below trials may offer more options for our patients.
 
Accruing Trials for Patients with BCG-Unresponsive Urothelial Cancer
 
- Erdafitinib vs. investigator choice of intravesical chemotherapy (gemcitabine or mitomycin C) for those with FGFR mutation or fusion (NCT04172675)
- Intravesical gemcitabine plus pembrolizumab (NCT04164082)
- Durvalumab plus S-488210/S-488211 (5-peptide cancer vaccine) (NCT04106115)
- PREVERT - Avelumab plus radiation (NCT03950362)
- Intravesical TLD-1433 (photosensitizer) plus photodynamic therapy (NCT03945162)
- Intravesical durvalumab (NCT03759496)
- QUILT 3.032 - Intravesical BCG plus ALT-803 (IL-15 superagonist) (NCT03022825)
- HX008 (PD-1 antibody) (NCT04738630)
- LEGEND Study – EG-70 (non viral gene therapy encoding two RIG-1 agonists)
- ADAPT-BLADDER – durvalumab with radiation and BCG (NCT03317158)
- BOND-003 – Phase 3 trial of CG0070 (oncolytic immunotherapy) and N-dodecyl-B-D-maltoside (detergent) (NCT04452591)
- CORE-001 – CG0070 with pembrolizumab (NCT04387461)
- Sun-RISe-1 – Cetrelimab (PD-1 inhibitor), TAR-200 (continuous intravesical release gemcitabine) or combination (NCT04640623)
- CGC – Intravesical cabazitaxel, gemcitabine and cisplatin (NCT02202772)
 
Written by: Evan Yu, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Member, Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Clinical Research Director, Genitourinary Oncology, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Medical Director, Clinical Research Service, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Consortium, Seattle, Washington
References
 
1 Packiam VT et al. "Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: Intravesical treatments beyond Bacille Calmette-Gurin." Cancer. 2017. 123:390-400.
2 Kamat AM et al. "BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: recommendations from the IBCG." Nat Rev Urol. 2017. 14:244-55.
3 Balar AV, et al. "Pembrolizumab monotherapy for high-risk, non-muscle invasive bladder cancer." Lancet Oncol. 2021. 22:919-30.
4 Chang SS, et al. J Clin Oncol 40, no. 6_suppl 2022. 431-431.
5 Rosser CJ, et al. "Safety, Tolerability, and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of an IL-15 analogue (N-803) Admixed with Bacillus Calmette-Gurin (BCG) for the Treatment of Bladder Cancer." Oncoimmunology. 2021. 10:e1912885.
6 Yu EY. From the desk of Evan Yu: How can I keep my bladder, Doc? The BCG refractory non-muscle invasive bladder cancer question.  Urotoday Clinical Trials Portal.  July 9, 2018.
 
 




 

Well, I guess I had to briefly step out of my premium box seat & join in on the fun.  Thanks for the info Eoganacht.

Even though N-803 (Anktiva) + BCG hit relatively high CR marks for 12 months & 2 yrs at 42% & 36%, respectively, those marks will not likely be considered the new FDA (or even specialist) threshold imo.  This indication clearly needs more "suitable options" & I expect there will be additional treatment approvals in the future that may not exceed or even challenge those thresholds, especially when taking into account the ongoing BCG shortage.  The multiple trials investigating BCG as a preventative for Covid-19 look promising & this area of use will also likely put additional pressure on supply lines moving forward.  Add in the fact that BCG requires so many instillations (& therefore hospital &/or specialty center attendances) & the fact that Covid is here to stay for the time being, this will likely add to further treatment delays for this high-risk/elderly patient group...our two-treatment option certainly should minimize risk for delays.  There are also patients who will be non-compliant considering the number of treatments.  Lastly, some patients are simply hypersensitive/intolerant to BCG & it's side effects.  

All of the above will be recurring obstacles for ImmunityBio, & the door for FDA/HC approval will certainly remain wide open for our ACT, even if we don't hit the same durable response marks...though I think we have great potential to achieve those marks, if not achieve higher...

I also noted that of the 14 trials, there are only 4 others that are monotherapies, & each requires significantly more treatments than ours.  This puts us in an especially attractive "stand-alone" category & should be a welcomed option.  JMO & good luck...



<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>