After watching Paolo Geurreiro scoring against Australia, I thought let's stay on topic and talk about drug dosing.
Today/now yesterday I was made aware of the differences in dosing between Cynata and MSB, the number 1/4 was mentioned.
When looking into that, I found the following:
MSB (as per February presentation):
View attachment 1165743
Cynata:
Cohort A & B: 2 doses
Meaning:
Day 28:
MSB injected 16 mio (8 x 2 mio*) cells per kg bodyweight
CYP injected between 2 mio (2 x 1 mio - lower dose) and 4 mio (2 x 2 mio) cells per kg bodyweight
Day 100:
MSB injected 24 mio (16 mio + 4 x 2 mio*) cells per kg bodyweight
CYP unchanged between 2-4 mio cells per kg bodyweight
Lets take a 80kg male (below average Japanese, average Aussie/European and way way way below average American):
On day 100 -
MSB injected
1.92 billion cells
Cynata injected between
160 mio cells (lower dose -
1/12 of MSB's) and
320 mio cells (higher dose -
1/6 of MSB's)!
- a lot less cells per treatment/adult
- according to management lower cost of production per cell
Yet, our results (as per previous post):
Cohort A:
Day 28:
OR 100% (8/8)
CR 12.5% (1/8)
Survival rate 87.5% (7/8)
Day 100:
CR 50% (4/8)
Day 180:
Survival rate 87.5% (7/8)
Cohort B:
Day 28:
OR 86% (6/7)
CR 57% (4/7)
Survival rate 100% (7/7)
In comparison to MSB:
- our cells appear to "kick in" a lot faster (day 28: OR 100% compared to 69%),
- our patients seem to life longer (day 100: 87.5% compared to 75%), and all still alive after 6 months (MSB has not yet reported that figure),
- our patients have a greater chance of CR (A 28 days 12.5%/less than MSB using 1/12 of the cells MSB has used & 100 days 50%, B 28 days 57% using 1/6 of the cells MSB has used), compared to... MSB hasn't reported their CR rate? Neither 28 nor 100 days? Unless I missed it. Help? Please note, this is incorrect. MSB reported a CR of 29% at day 28 and a PR of 40% = OR of 69% compared to Cynata A 100%/B 86%).
Also worth while noting that only 89% of their patients (children - less cells needed as based on body weight) are of the worst grade, while ours are 100% (adults).
Please note, this is incorrect. As per graph released yesterday, A consisted of 5/8 patients with Grade 3 and B consisted of 4/7 patients with Grade 3. Interesting however, it appears that the worse the disease, the better the chance of a CR (A 100 3/4 patients, B 28 2/4 patients).
Our trial recruited 16 patients (15 dosed), compared to MSB's figures being based on 55 patients.
And all that with a partner lined up, willing to pay the bills from P2 onwards (as opposed to a credit facility).
Yes, maybe the two companies cannot/shouldn't be compared with each other.
Enough to proceed straight to P2 trials not just in GvHD, but also in all other diseases using our cells, as long as pre-clinical data is compelling.
Speaking of multiple shots on goal (if only the same could be applied to the Socceroos vs. Peru...): MSCs, currently ~850 clinical trials world wide in ~70 different disease targets.
#mindblowing
Please correct me if wrong.
*
https://globenewswire.com/news-rele...tment-of-Acute-Graft-Versus-Host-Disease.html
(20min delay)