Telix ASX TLX Breaking News & Current Commentary, page-3017

• Sorry abz, finally getting back to you with the questions you asked me some time ago. One at a time if that’s ok.
• 
  
• 1. “Address their half life issues.

I’m assuming you’re referring to our half life issues and not theirs? Our short half life (1hour) compared to the next generation’s (up to 48 hours) is a disadvantage in that it doesn’t allow delayed imaging. As per below it means we are missing lesions that the next generation imaging is detecting up to 6 months earlier. If you’re a patient, which product are you going to insist on having?

Additionally the longer half life allows more flexibility to patient scheduling. It also translates in to far longer shelf life so that the next generation product can be delivered to any clinic in the US from 1 centralised manufacturing centre.

• 
  
• 
  
• “In trial participants where standard of care (SOC Pylarify and Illucix) imaging was unable to detect any lesions, up to approximately 60% had lesions identified by same-day imaging with ⁶⁴Cu-SAR-bisPSMA and up to 80% on next-day imaging, with high specificity on both days. The number of lesions identified by ⁶⁴Cu-SAR-bisPSMA almost doubled from same-day (up to 80) to next-day imaging (up to 153).
• One of the reasons for the higher detection of lesions on next-day imaging was due to the ability of ⁶⁴Cu-SAR-bisPSMA to detect much smaller lesions compared to other prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) agents, including a lesion with a diameter of less than 2 mm.
• For all lesions, regardless of their size, ⁶⁴Cu-SAR-bisPSMA lesion uptake increased by more than 80% and lesion contrast increased almost 5 times when comparing same-day to next-day imaging.
• A key observation was the high uptake and contrast observed in lesions of less than 5 mm”

Reference: Phase 2 Cobra Trial 2024