Wino115 wrote: Recalling some of the original discussion around what kind of therapy they were hoping for, a lot revolved around the idea that their PDC internalized really quickly into the tumor cell via SORT1 and, because of that, it fooled MDC-1 reflux resistance, so got to work killing the cell where other drugs didn't. So 1) rapid internalization & 2) gets by resistance. That is a "key" into the cell, otherwise it woudl be puked out and be no better than any other drug.
In a way, we sort of saw tantalizing possibilities with patient #2 who was on it for 30 weeks or so, and the fact we saw some positive signs on patients who were treated and then resisted, on average, 8 other drugs. The plasma work probably also showed it internalized given the 11% free number. Marsolais has said they saw it internalize quickly.
We haven't seen it in enough patients yet to be sure, but if so, it would be the key --you get in tumors that others can't, you get in fast, you kill it off. We saw bits and pieces of all of that. Maybe they've seen more of the same. Remember, we know it most likely will work this way on 30-50% of the patients if we're lucky. It won't work for everyone given the different tumors, environments, previous treatments, type of cancer and physiology.
PWIB123 wrote: Nah, I don't think so. Maybe, but in the context of how THTX has communicated in the past and the point in time with which the statement is being made, it's highly unlikely. I think they want the investment community to know they have something, but aren't quite ready to articulate exactly how it is the key.
palinc2000 wrote: The statement by itself means absolutely nothing because it is missing the following
'´and we are in the midst of conducting a Phase 1 b Clinical Trial in humans to prove that Concept"
However personnally I would not have posted that statement unless I had seen some results in humans resembling some of the spectacular results in the pre clinical study .That would be the most favorable interpretation of why he issued that statement at this time
A less favorable interpretation would be that he has not seen anything in the trial that would obviously lead to the conclusion that the Concept cannot be proven..... In the latter the dream is still alive and maybe the need to raise cash is imminent
qwerty22 wrote:
I guess you could say this is based on preclinical and Ph1a but with 1b running if they aren't sitting on something that is either a solid, decent responder number or looks odds on to convert into that in the near future then I don't know what......
Given he hasn't shut up. It's time to put up Paul!
longterm56 wrote: Interesting. At first I thought this quote was an "overstatement" by an enthisiastic CEO in front of the public, but if that was the case they would not have continued to publicize it, would they?
-LT
TH1902 wrote: https://twitter.com/Theratech_/status/1575188642175369216?s=20&t=QS8afHeKpFBSgstkF5qaLw