Having gone back through earlier presentations from 2017 and...

Having gone back through earlier presentations from 2017 and 2018, I can see why our Targeted Therapies deserve every bit of attention, especially PTX-100 at this juncture. Whilst PTX-200 is no longer a core asset, it has been core to the development of CellPryme as hightlighted by Hottod from the information contained in our patent submission.

PTX-100 really has become a surprise package. As a monotherapy in Phase 1 trials, it has been exhibiting efficacy in two subtypes of TCL beyond expectations given that Phase 1 trials are primarily conducted to study the safety of drugs with potential to deliver clinical activity. PTX clearly made the right move to focus on the indications, namely PTCL and CTCL, in the expansion of the trial. The following stats on the subtype AITL tells us (I think) why the FDA granted us ODD for all TCL types of cancer-




Not enough new patients to even try to recruit in a Phase 1 trial by us in Aust but certainly enough patients to potentially recruit in a Phase 2 trial in the US of multiple sites. T-cell Lymphomas seems to be remain an extremely underserved blood cancer group. PTX-100 also has unexplored potential across a range of other cancer types including solid tumours where it could effectively be used in combination therapy to replace chemotherapy.

Please note that the following slides are from a 2018 preso, but pehaps you @dalts66 can shed some light on the relevance now that we are in 2023 and have been following the activity in the industry of KRAS since I've been in PTX for over the last 2 yrs.....




Whilst OmniCAR garnered the limelight during the bull market (dare I say the bull s___ market), it has since required way more optimisation at the pre-clinical stage and really proven nowhere near ready for the clinic which, in a strangely fortituous way, has been to our benefit. CellPryme-M whilst touted as "clinic-ready" which it sort of is, requires pre-clinical validation by inidivual companies in order to work into their specific trial design protocols, etc which takes time. Not sure if we know what the so-called "interesting findings of CP-A" are that Steven refered to in the last webinar. I can't recall if they were referenced in the AGM which was my expectation. CP-A is 6 mths off being in the picture going by the timeline graph.

I'm really looking forward to Stuart's Pitt St webinar tomorrow that I hope I can make the time to attend (live) at 2pm AEST. The report has some great stuff in it. Here's the link to register for atttendance: https://*.com.au/events/pitt-street-research-ptx/