Theralase Technologies Inc. V.TLT

" Missing 18 Pending patients data"

[wildbird1]

Like almost everybody on this board, I have always thought that the 12 undertreated patients were influencing negatively the CR% data... not anymore, after reading the 2Q2020 & 3Q2021 Quaterly Newsletter, I did change my mind.
I am going agains the grain here by saying that there is absolutely no undertreated patients left in the study11 trial, or should I say, all the undertreated patients that were still in the study11 trial have all been treated with the optimized treatment protocol.

Let me explain.
If you take the time to read the 2Q2020 Quaterly Newsletter, you will see that 4/12 patients have been removed from the study11 trial, and the 8 undertreated patients left in the study11 trial, have by now all been treated with the optimized treatment protocol.Conclusively, except for the 3 patients from the 1B Study trial, all the patients in the Study11 trial have been treated with the optimized treatment protocol.

If all the patients in the study11 trial have been treated with the optimized treatment protocol, why is it that in the Nov 29, 2022 Newsrelease at 450 days the CR% is only 28%.
The answer could be as simple as, we are missing 18 pending patients data.

From the Nov 29,2022 Newsrelease.
The data at 450 Days are...
Complete response(CR)..............28%..............8 Patients.
Indeterminated response(IR).......10%..............3 patients.
Pending patients...........................62%............18 patients.
Evaluable patients........................100%...........29 patients.

Note:1) These 18 pending patients could not be all NR(Non Response) patients, as from the 3Q2021 Quaterly Newslletter(page 5), the non response% for the optimized patients group was very very low, approximately 6%NR(non response).
Note:2) only 6%NR( non response) is impressive, when you know that all the patients in the stud11 trial have been treated with the optimized treatment protocol.

In the Nov 29,2022 NewsRelease at 450 days we have the data on only 11 patients(8CR+3IR), not the complete data on 29 patients.
Of the 11 patients 8 are CR = 73%CR.
Note:3) Is it possible for the 450 Days CR% to be higher than the 90 Days CR%? The answer could be yes, as the 450 days patients have received 2 treatments, and some of the IR patients coud have become CR patients after the second treatment.

To Sum Up...
Take the time to go on TLT website under Investors Ressources (Quaterly Newsletter), re-read the 
2Q2020 Quaterly Newsletter(bottom of page 2...of the 8 patients eligible....).
And the 3Q2021 Quaterly Newsletter(page 5...90 day preliminary interim results on 18 optimized patients...NR(no response 6%))

After reading these 2 Quaterly Newsletter you will come to the same conclusion as DR.Mandel "We have impressive preliminary results"(Pressrelease June 24,2022).

Only the release of the complete data on the first 25 optimized patients will prove all the above.

[Oilminerdeluxe]

Wildbird, interesting post to say the least. If you are correct. So, the complete data on the 25 optimized patients should start to come in soon with a few new patients  next update? My feeble mind had not pondered that at all. Hope I did not misunderstand your post. Perhaps we will have substantial better numbers in the not so distant future then

[BlueFranky]

Thanks for your efforts here Wildbird! This post clearly needs to be bumped .. several times a day!

[Oilminerdeluxe]

When reading that, oh man. Hope the smart folks on the board lends a few minutes to discuss it (I need to digest the talk tomorrow while at work, when the boss is not around). Mind-boggling if so many patients are left to influence the CR in a positive way. And there is nothing that points to them having much different outcome from those already done. I apologize if I have misunderstood the whole

[Legit62]

If i were u oilminerdelux, i would sell both kidneys , load up while u can, then buy the kidneys back after we are multi millionaires

[Oilminerdeluxe]

I can always buy them back later! I have to say, if Wildbird is right, he sure made my day sparkle. Bring on the next update asap!

[CancerSlayer]

  Hi wildbird...it is my understanding that an evaluable patient is one who has already met statistical analysis criteria (i.e. has already had his 450 day assessment) & can therefore be included in the efficacy data.  I am therefore assuming the 18 pending patients = NR patients...this NR group was simply not included in the results/data chart as presented.   The CR%s are

[CancerSlayer]

  Based on the July 30, 2020 study II interim update...of the 8 who were eligible to receive a 2nd treatment,  only 5 of the 8 went on to receive a 2nd optimized treatment...the other 3 had already received a 2nd "non-optimized" treatment, which had been given prior to the improvements being made to the protocol.

[wildbird1]

CancerSlayer, thank's for your response, I like it when somebody take the time to read my post and point ou some interogations point that they have. If you take the time to read the April 29,2020 Newsrelease, TLT said " To date 8 patients have been treated at UHN and 4 patients treated at MUHC for a total of 12 patients". Note: These 12 patients are undertreated patients. In the

[Eoganacht]

I don't think the 18 patients are "pending". I believe 5 of them were removed from the trial, 1 died, and the remaining 12 were evaluated NR at 450 days. I also think results will improve as more patients are treated and evaluated.

[wildbird1]

When I write a post, I always try to provide as much as possible the source of the information I did use to prove my point(Newsletter, Quaterly... etc). If you want to prove me wrong, you must prove that the Quaterly & Newsletter that I did use to prove my point are wrong. Just saying that I am wrong doesn't work. If TLT has already said that they are going to apply for BTD approval &

[Rumpl3StiltSkin]

I'm not going to say anyone's view is wright or wrong. I like the analysis here being done. To me, what is important now is each time we get new data. The late data % numbers, that are quite large % CR seem to shift from right to left, displacing the worser % numbers that were there in the previous period. As long as we continue to see that we will have Decent CR % numbers when it is time

[Oilminerdeluxe]

A call to the company could perhaps bring clarity to the whole thing? Anyone not me up for it?

[enriquesuave]

5 of the initial 12 undertreated patients were dropped from trial before ever getting a second treatment.  Of the 7 remaining patients from the initial 12, only 4 got a second treatment which was optimized.   "Theralase Provides Update on Bladder Cancer Study Toronto, Ontario – September 24, 2020, Theralase® Technologies Inc. (“Theralase” or

[enriquesuave]

Under the revised trial protocol. None should have been dropped as none of the 12 had any sign of progression.  They were only dropped because were NR.  They would have under updated protocol gotten at least a second treatment.  Now of course all patients get 2 Optimized Treatments.  ( unless progression is detected during trial)

[consultant99]

I remember that PR thanks for posting it. Now for the big money question; For the 5 of the original 12 that were dropped and not given a second treatment - were they counted as treated and NR? I would assume yes but not sure. If yes then the data for 450 days included 5 patients with 1 unopitimized treatment, 1 patient that died in the phase 1 trial, 3 patients that received the unoptimized