Theratechnologies Inc T.TH

Part of the challenge for TH

[SPCEO1]

Interesting article. Here is the concluding paragraph:

The bottom line is that achieving and maintaining relevance with the top buyside funds in an ever-expanding universe of investable opportunities only comes through hard work and planning, plus a healthy dose of good fortune in R&D. This buyside relevancy is critical to getting the attention required to access funding at a reasonable cost of capital – which is an existential requirement for success in loss-making R&D-stage biotech over the long term.

https://lifescivc.com/2021/06/biotechs-relevancy-challenge-in-an-expanding-universe/

[scarlet1967]

  I believe all the below from that article applies to the whole market, stock markets is mostly a closed system so the the same capital goes around between all listed companies, meaning there is a significant competition for those funds whether the source of money is the retail segment or institutions. Those who managed to master the “relevancy challenge” by doing all this article is

[qwerty22]

It's a great article but in a way there is an assumption in it of building from a neutral place to success. But that doesn't quite fit with THTX because they've pretty much been on the typical biotech rollercoaster ride and are at the bottom. So it's more than just building relevancy, there's restoring reputation having burnt all their bridges. I think my mistake  was to

[Wino115]

Those are exactly the right questions to ask and with their investor strategy, they must assume they  are near the bottom of investor attention, as you say.  All of this is far easier with clinical success which brings into focus the future of the pipeline. We and these new investors who bought in see reason to be hopeful, but the rest of the market won't notice anything unless the

[SPCEO1]

Maybe we will get some clinical milestones on Monday. The new website says about TH-1902: "The Phase 1 clinical trial includes a dose-escalating part to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and preliminary anti-tumor activity of TH1902". So, maybe we will hear something about the preliminary anti-tumor activity and that will start to lower the clincial

[scarlet1967]

This is what I have been thinking about a lot, the forth cycle 200mg/m2 completed May 24 and fifth cycle 300mg/m2 completed June 14 absent toxicity both are at or above the therapeutic dose of docetaxel so in theory if they had the second patient prepared to participate after the first patient passed away they could have observed tumour regression already with other words since their PDC only

[juniper88]

I feel it is still too early to have any kind of efficacy signal.  Basically, there are 2 ways that the oncologist use to determine if there is efficacy from a treatment.  First, there is blood work for a tumor marker.  This is usually done a couple of days before the next treatment.  However, not every cancer has a reliable tumor marker and not every patient is sensitive to

[scarlet1967]

I am not sure how often they do imaging/blood tests so we soon find out but the thing which has baffling me is if throughout the trials the efficacy benefits due to MTD stops at 4th and 5th cycle after they have taken the data to 3+3 and another 3+3 and another.,, would that dosage be good enough for FDA and the drug would have a significant therapeutic benefits to be commercialized? in a sense

[qwerty22]

Are you saying can they get approval based on 6 or 12 or 15 patients? No.  If the results are astounding? No

[scarlet1967]

I don't think you got my point what I am saying is approval based on full spectrum of planned patients for all phases  of the trials but a therapeutic level equivalent to 4th or 5th cycle. 

[qwerty22]

Ok I get it now. What you're talking about is therapeutic window. I remember reading that using this 3+3 method is that if you get to the point of 2 of 6 DLTs then drop down to the MTD then what you end up with is a dose where 40-70% of patients experience a grade 3/4 toxicity from treatment with that drug.  If your efficacy dose is at or close to the MTD, that is if you can't drop

[scarlet1967]

Yes, hopefully no DLTs at 6th or 7th cycle or not at all, one thing which is also important is the overall profile of the drug, tumour chemoresistance (efflux), improved cytotoxic activity, reversal of tumour-induced immunosuppression, prevention of metastasis, impact on vasculogenic mimicry etc. so even with “narrow therapeutic window” one has to presume other beneficial aspects of targeted

[qwerty22]

I think a lot of those things you list actually get rolled up into the overall efficacy of the drug, so for example preventing metastasis might be another way of saying stopping recurrence which would play into the PFS aspect of efficacy. To me cancer is sort of simple and complicated. When you have an strongly performing drug it's fairly easy to see that, it's when it's at the

[qwerty22]

We should hope for an efficacy signal in part 1 but also be aware that the main focus of that part of the trial is safety, dose etc. The fact they can enrol cancers that weren't tested preclinically is a nod to that. Part 2 is designed to discover PoC on efficacy. I'm not ruling out efficacy in part 1 but it's really secondary. This paper suggests scans every 2 cycles is normal for