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 canadapieton Dec 07, 2022 10:48am
153 Views
Post# 35156185

RE:RE:RE:RE:Open Label?

RE:RE:RE:RE:Open Label?
" I'm still curious what unconvincing efficacy might mean "


Serious QUESTION: 

what about that "KEY" ?????? 



RE:RE:RE:Open Label?

I think you might be over-optimistic that science will come up with the answer here. Palinc is right they might not move forward but if they do they might still be mostly doing it thru guesswork. Mostly looking at what worked with others. That might be fine purely on the basis that the reward for reactivating the program is so high but it would likely have a high risk of failure. My instinct is that if they are going to solve this with science then that's more likely a months/years project rather than weeks. But who knows maybe the answer is close at hand.

I've been trying to put myself in their shoes. I mostly expect there is a huge sense of disbelief. The preclinical was solid. They went through multiple steps to show the basic MOA was at play here. They did enough expts to show Sortilin was being engaged and the PDC being internalized even in resistant scenarios. As JayJay pointed out earlier the toxicity is another clue that in the patients the PDC is doing it's thing just unfortunately in healthy tissue. The absence of neutropenia (assuming it isn't showing up) would be telling. This is a really fat signal in docetaxel treatment, you'd expect it to show up in even a small number of patients if this was purely docetaxel-like toxicity. If it is absent there is some suggestion the PDC is discriminating between certain tissues. That in my book is a further clue the PDC can work. The scenario being it's finding the Sortilin in eyes and nerves, not hitting white blood cells because they don't have Sortilin. But why not hitting tumours?


I keep coming back in my mind to the tumour micro-environment (TME). We know this is a barrier for many drugs. We know the conditions in the tumour are different to the rest of the body. There's a lot of thought that a mouse Xenograft isn't a great analog to real world human tumours. From the things we know publicly there aren't a lot of clues about how the PDC would handle the TME. The problem could lie there. I identified pH as a possibility largely because I think that is testable in the lab but if they didn't get any quick answers from something like that then I think the complexity of the TME would suggest a long slog to find an answer. I'm speculating here, I'm looking for where there might be holes in the preclinical. There are probably many more, it's was never easy for them  to cover every possibility.

I'm still curious what unconvincing efficacy might mean. Almost no efficacy? If it's something more than that what does the pattern of efficacy signals look like? Could it be that the drug works on the smallest tumours (one's most like mouse tumours, my guess) but fails on the bigger tumours picked to be the RECIST tumours? Maybe they have clues like that.

All guessing in the dark here.

 

 


<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>