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

Theratechnologies Inc T.TH

Alternate Symbol(s):  THTX

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

Comment by palinc2000on Oct 17, 2022 4:08pm
118 Views
Post# 35029878

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Designing the basket trials

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Designing the basket trials"We think we have the key but so did the 94% of oncology drug developers who failed to get approval EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE SPENT BILLIONS AND HAVE BEEN ONCOLOGY GRUG DEVELOPERS FOR MANY MANY YEARS

ANALIAS00 wrote: I fully agree with that statement.
qwerty22 wrote:

I mean the brutally honest version of the "key" comment would be 

"We think we have the key but so did the 94% of oncology drug developers who failed to get approval"

Does that work for setting expectations?

 

qwerty22 wrote:

 

You are getting very frustrating.

You want expectations set better but below I pointed out that Christian in one of his comments took the data release right out to the end of Ph1b and you dismissed it as an "after thought".

You seem to accept that the company has set the standard of two confirmed responders in one cancer type before they begin talking about the ongoing trial yet you also want to see every positive sign on the way to there.

Everything that is happening now is biotech 101. Execs will coax people through long trials with the hope of early data based on improbable best case scenarios. Paul did what I see many biotech CEOs do. Biotechs with integrity will hold out talking about ongoing data accrual until it tells a supportable story, we aren't at that point yet with 1b and it took the full extent of 1a to get to that point in that trial. It's all frustrating but non of it is that surprising.

Hopefully we get a Christmas present but it needs to be recognized that while there will be many opportunities to get responders through to the end of 2022 there will be many more in the 1st Q of 2023 and even some beyond that. Responders can arise where the opportunity exists, that might mean 2023. There will be some aspects of the response that ONLY appear in 2023 like duration of response or duration in the SD patients. These could be key aspects of the story. Patience is still key.

 

SPCEO1 wrote: And TH needs to explain these things more clearly too. It is hard to understand why they don't set expectations better. They know everything about the phase 1b trial design and the limitations it brings with it - why not spell it out for investors instead of saying they think they have the key to cancer and they will have results between mid-August and Christmas? Why go quiet for 6-8 months during the phase 1a trial? Why bring on Dr. Rotthenberg and then hide him in the background? 

One can put together both positive and negative scenarios for why they have done these things but the stock is going to more likely reflect the negative scenarios until they clear things up. Hopefully, they get a second efficacy signal on a single cancer type soon and they quickly announce a protocol amendment. 

Wino has laid out Trodelvy's wild ride to approval and being acquired in the past. Most of the value for shareholders occurred in the very last stage after an arduous, contentious, mistake-filled journey to get there. In the end, either the drug works or it doesn't. Maybe we will soon get additional info that it works beyond the phase 1a results. That will hardly be the end of the road but it will allow Wino to check of some of his derisking boxes on his spreadsheet  and that will be a very good thing.
 

 

palinc2000 wrote:

Very helpful !!! THTX is dealing with very complex issues and for sure each new day presents its own set of challenges
Again eveyone needs to calm down
 

 

scarlet1967 wrote:

 

There are various designs for basket trials and the company hasn’t released any details for their phase1b trial. As per FDA master protocol’s guidance each subgroup’s safety will have to be evaluated individually if necessary corrective actions etc.

There is also potentials for information borrowing across subgroups, effective statistical analysis, time and cost savings for certain types of basket trial(Bayesian designs). I am sure the CROs/sponsors would choose the best design for the trial. 

Point is trying to interpret and make anticipations for every sentence every word from the company can be quite premature not knowing the real reason again as far as we know the phase1b is ongoing, patients are being enrolled in whatever pattern based on a logical explanation which will supports the overall purpose, “less complex yet more effective basket trial”. 

 

 

 

 

 

The Benefits of Using Basket Studies in Oncology

 

Basket trials are quite flexible in terms of design; they can be Bayesian, Frequentist, Adaptive or a mix of any of these. Bayesian basket trials are flexible and efficient as a range of design elements can be explored and implemented. However, there is a trade-off between efficiency and complexity. The complexity of basket studies leads to challenges around the study design, statistical modeling and analysis, statistical properties, and operational considerations.

In a recent Cytel webinar on Expanding Applications of Master Protocols, James Matcham, VP Strategic Consulting at Cytel, presents on how the statistical approaches have developed from treating each indication separately, to Bayesian designs where information can be shared among indications to reduce overall sample size, time and costs.

 

https://academic.oup.com/biostatistics/article/23/1/120/5831921

 

Most recently, more sophisticated methods in the framework of Bayesian model averaging (Madigan and Raftery, 1994Draper, 1995) have been applied to analyzing basket trials. Psioda and others (2019)average over the complete model space, which is constituted by all models for possible configurations of the subgroups that may demonstrate the same or disparate efficacy. In a model that assumes identical treatment effect among specific subgroups, information is pooled across the corresponding subgroups under the assumption of inter-patient exchangeability.

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.iconplc.com/insights/blog/2022/06/14/using-bayesian-based-model-assisted-designs-in-early-phase-oncology-trials/

 

Studies that want to test a drug in patients with different types of cancer may also benefit from deploying basket designs within a master protocol when obtaining preliminary efficacy data. Extracting information across cohorts can also improve the efficiency of the statistical analysis using a Bayesian framework. As oncology therapeutics and early phase design models evolve, sponsors will benefit from working with a partner experienced in innovative adaptive designs for phase 1 and 2 oncology trials.

 


 
"We think we have the key but so did the 94% of oncology drug developers who failed to get approval"
 

 

 




<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>