Replies to post #207005 on Biotech Values

[ronpopeil]

There are a few cd47 companies that have partnered which are earlier stages than tril

[dewophile]

TRIL

Couldn't some of the pessimism be in the need to partner to test with other agents? Look at NKTR which either couldn't or wouldn't get a deal to partner 214 with a bit more data than what TRIL has to date. They ended up doing a fairly big Ph1/2 with BMY where costs are shared I doubt TRIL has the resources for something that size

If the TRIL solid tumor trial shows an encouraging immune response like the NKTR drug they should get significant interest from PD-1 players, but you are correct they would be stretching their resources to do a comparable deal.

I'm not really sure why the stock tanked after ASH - i thought (wrongly) that the modest activity would provide a lift given prospects for better activity in combination regimens and/or indications with stronger preclinical activity such as AML. My best guess is that the activity is perhaps being chalked up by most as fluky given it occurred only in the lowest dose cohorts. More significantly, the tox at doses that are below receptor saturation results in short half life so you don't get continuous exposure to active drug and also concerns re tissue penetration (in short lack of a therapeutic window).