RE:Let the 450 day CR% numbers talk.
wildbird1 wrote: If you want to feel good about your investment in TLT, always recheck the 450 CR% numbers.
2Q2020.......90DayCR% = 25%CR.........450DayCR%.......(No data yet).
1Q2021...............".............= 33.3%CR...............".................(No data yet).
3Q2021...............".............= 42%CR..................".................12%CR
April,2022............".............= 44.7%CR..............."................18.4%CR.
Aug,2022.............".............= 50.7%CR..............."................21%CR.
Nov 2022.............".............= 53%CR.................."................28%CR.
1) The FDA know that as more optimized patients are treated the 450day 28%CR will go up.
2) Big Pharma also know that as more optimized patients are treated the 450day 28%CR will go up.
3) We must keep in mind, that every time the 450day CR% goes up, the $value of a big pharma deal goes up.
In short...Big pharma can't afford to wait too long to engage in a money deal talk with TLT.
4) Many doctors refuse to recommend the use of Keytruda for their patients.
5) The FDA has to find an affordable alternative to Keytruda, or many patients will needlessly die because of a lact of better treatments.
6) The time is ripe for the FDA to consider giving TLT treatment a chance with BTD.
Note: I don't worry about the SP or financing, as we all know that it is the 450dayCR% that will determine TLT future, and the 450dayCR% numbers are getting better and better, and nobody on this board can contradic that fact.
From 12%CR to 28%CR at 450day in approximately 12 months(140% increase).
Ask yourself, with more optimized patients treated, what will be the 450dayCR% in 6 or 12 months, and does the FDA already know the answer to that question?
Understanding that the FDA & Big Pharma are aware that the 450dayCR% numbers are increasing steadily, always give me a good and reassuring feeling about my investment in TLT.
Thanks & well stated wildbird1....
The need for additional funding is a given & should have little impact on TLT's future. One also can't deny our improved CRs with optimization.
I also think Keytruda won't make a dent in the NMIBC market due to its relatively low efficacy & high cost....the fact is, many urologists appear to be currently using sequential chemo aka gemcitabine & docetaxel (Gem/Doce) as their de facto option during the BCG shortage. Imo, our competition in the near term will be with Gem/Doce & not Keytruda. Gem/Doce has demonstrated better efficacy than Keytruda & is less expensive. However, as long as our CRs maintain their current trends, I believe TLT's ACT will make/leave its mark for NMIBC.
'Prospective" trials/data looking at the use of Gem/Doce in the BCG "unresponsive" setting are still lacking (unlike our ACT), & compared to our ACT, the number of recommended Gem/Doce treatments is significantly higher with 6 weekly induction treatments & up to 22 additional monthly maintenance treatments, depending on response (for a total of "28" intravesical treatments). Each Gem/Doce treatment is also given sequentially (one after the other), which prolongs the encounter time by up to 90 min.
I not only see the potential of our ACT as an effective/lower-cost stand-alone competitor amongst current practices, but it also seems our ACT could be easily integrated/paired with current practice (i.e. Gem/Doce) in order to help improve efficacy/durable responses & potentially reduce treatment-burden/side effects...by reducing the overall number of treatments or treatment dosage. This combo scenario would take advantage of the primary cytotoxic benefits of the chemo as well as the cytotoxic & immunogenic properties of our ACT....JMHO. Thanks for the great post & good luck...