Theratechnologies Inc T.TH

Alternate Symbol(s): THTX

Healthcare Biotechnology

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

Theratechnologies Inc > New PR Announcing Initiation of Basket Trial

<< Previous

Bullboard Posts

Next >>

Comment by PWIB123on May 10, 2022 11:14am

190 Views

Post# 34670446

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:New PR Announcing Initiation of Basket Trial

That's a reasonable take on the PR.

qwerty22 wrote:
You don't have to suppose about the dose for the expansion phase, it's 300. That's a reasonably good outcome. I think Wino said he was relatively confident they would show that. I wasn't given the trouble they had at 420. That's a small win today.

It good to try to ask why they didn't give us any more detail today. I have a simple answer. They don't have a clear, reportable efficacy signal yet. Without that reporting the details would most be reporting toxicities. There is other stuff that we would all be interested in reading but in the context of some toxicities and no efficacy it probably raises as many questions as it answers. So that's my best explanation for them not revealing anything much other than what is necessary for them to tell us the expansion phase is starting.

There's more pessamistic reads from today along the lines that they have stuff they want to hide. Somebody else can talk about that if they want.

The next big question is why don't they have an efficacy signal. The horrible thing to say, after waiting all this time, is likely it's still to early. I'm working on a maximum of 13 evaluable patients from 1a. Some of them may have dropped out both reaching 2 scans (4 cycles) which would be the minimum for a truly reportable, solid efficacy signal. The last six patients probably aren't at that point just because not enough time has passed. Given we can rule out efficacy at lower doses then the pool of patients from which you might get a reportable efficacy signal is tiny at this point in time.

I hate that they are telling us nothing but in the scenario were they have no efficacy signal it's probably the best thing to do. Trying to dig into data that lacks an efficacy signal is most likely just going to look like trying to polish a turd. And I don't think they have a turd (not yet anyway).

Biobob wrote: You can suppose what you want ... they leave all the possibilities ot suppositions open to us so we can continue to suppose.. I suppose.