Rasmus H

1.8K posts

Rasmus H banner
Rasmus H

Rasmus H

@RazBioTech

Founder @ https://t.co/rvCWR16DUM | 🧬 #biotech retail investor | 👀 $OCUL maxi | 🌎 Global citizen | 👋 always happy to connect

London, England शामिल हुए Ekim 2014
283 फ़ॉलोइंग662 फ़ॉलोवर्स
Mike
Mike@Mikeptyg·
It’s kind of ironic that $OCUL investors don’t know they were the ones that were mislead by the fake Duravyu safety data . The “Dream Team” wants to downplay $EYPT as a competitor by presenting a false narrative on Duravyu safety data. Pathetic move by $OCUL .
English
2
1
2
879
JeremyF
JeremyF@JeremyFalmouth·
@Mikeptyg @TripESU89 Well there is the number “3” listed in the endoopthalmitis row for the 3mg treatment eyes…I’m not going back to the clinical trials site to snip the image for you.
English
1
0
5
95
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@Biotech_FC It’s either because the data doesn’t paint Axpaxli in good light, i.e despite stringent rescue rules 2mg performs well OR that they strategically want to dismiss that the control arm is relevant (to stay true to this being just an academic exercise for regulatory purposes).
English
0
0
1
50
Fat Shot Drug
Fat Shot Drug@Biotech_FC·
@RazBioTech I’m pretty surprised they didn’t disclose this data as they did for the Axpaxli arm.
English
1
0
0
47
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
$OCUL I would pay $10,000 to see how the 2mg control arm in SOL-1 would have behaved at 24 weeks with SOL-R rescue criteria applied (5ltr+75um) instead of the 15 letter insanity (mandated by FDA) applied in the superiority study.
English
3
0
8
1.4K
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@savesightMD Yeah might have a market but I think it’ll be a rounding error vs TKI’s, simply too early and too many unknowns.
English
0
0
0
125
Oreo the dog
Oreo the dog@savesightMD·
@RazBioTech I am curious how you are factoring in a Phase 3 success by $FDMT? If their data and safety holds up, this will be a potential single treatment cure for many patients. That is the ultimate duration extender.
English
1
1
0
160
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@Sjfms1Steven Agree perception but ultimately the preference for getting fewer as opposed to more injections, in the eye or elsewhere, is strong or very strong. Proven over and over. Don’t understand the bear case, are people suggesting drug isn’t durable? Or that durability doesn’t matter?
English
0
0
2
51
SJFSB
SJFSB@Sjfms1Steven·
@RazBioTech I do a needle once a week. I still shudder at the idea of getting one in the eye. I did however just have 2 cataracts removed and it was a walk in the park. Everything is perception. Efficacy is still king.
English
1
0
1
80
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@nalyticsatwork It’s so obvious. It’s what made Vabysmo a winner.
English
0
0
3
111
Christopher Schultz
Christopher Schultz@nalyticsatwork·
@RazBioTech “Would you prefer 4 to 6 shots in eye per year or a single shot ?”
English
1
0
3
121
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@wallstlobo That’s what the bears shout. I think, for docs, the actual results of SOL-R will be much more important. The stable population recruited might show that up towards 90% are rescue free at 6-months in Ax arm. If so those optics are very good.
English
1
0
1
61
Fred Anthony
Fred Anthony@wallstlobo·
@RazBioTech Do Docs really wait for the "optimal commercial label" if the drug is available.
English
1
0
0
70
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
$OCUL this correctly separates “approval possible on one study” (which is company/FDA-aligned and will happen imho) from “optimal commercial label may need SOL-R input” (which is a practical regulatory reality). Dates obviously super speculative, but this take resonates with me.
SJFSB@Sjfms1Steven

$ocul @zipjet Looking at the FDA NDA process below, the one area that IMO, will require additional data is the Dosing/Safety (with respect to redosing) label negotiation at the end of the process. I believe SOL-1 easily satisfies all of the other requirements. SOL-1 does a good job with efficacy and general safety, but doesn't answer the question about redosing and safety associated with redosing, or efficacy for that matter if you want to be a stickler. SOL-R data could be submitted in February, falling within the 2-7 month window for additional information. So, IMO... the FDA will accept the NDA and will require SOL-R data for final label dosing and safety determination. NDA PROCESS....... 1. Filing Review (First ~60 days) July1 - Sept. 1 After submission, the FDA checks whether the NDA is complete enough to review. Key steps: -Administrative completeness check -Verification that all required clinical, safety, manufacturing, and labeling data are included. -Decision to “file” or refuse to file If accepted, the FDA assigns a PDUFA target action date under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. That date becomes the official review deadline. 2. Primary Scientific Review (Months 2–7) Sept. 1 - March 1 Multiple FDA teams review different parts of the application simultaneously: Clinical Review -Evaluates whether the drug actually works for the proposed indication. -Reviews clinical trial design, endpoints, and statistical validity. Statistical Review -Re-analyzes trial data to confirm results. Safety Review -Looks at adverse events and long-term safety signals. Pharmacology/Toxicology -Reviews animal and mechanistic data. CMC (Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls) -Ensures the drug can be manufactured consistently and safely. 3. FDA Questions to the Company (Throughout Review) During the review, the FDA sends information requests (IRs) or discipline review letters. The company must: -Provide additional data -Clarify analyses -Sometimes submit new manufacturing information or stability data These exchanges can happen multiple times. 4. Facility Inspections (Typically Months 6–9) Dec. 1 - March 30. The FDA inspects: -Drug manufacturing plants -Clinical trial sites -Testing laboratories These inspections verify: -Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) -Data integrity -Quality systems 5. Advisory Committee Meeting (If Needed) For some drugs, the FDA convenes an external expert panel, such as an advisory committee. Experts discuss: Clinical benefits Safety concerns Risk–benefit balance They then vote on whether the drug should be approved. The FDA is not required to follow the vote but often does. 6. Labeling Negotiation (Late Review Phase) The FDA and the company negotiate the drug label, including: -Approved indication -Dosing -Safety warnings -Contraindications -Risk mitigation programs (if needed) The label determines exactly how the drug can be marketed. 7. Final FDA Decision (PDUFA Date) Apr/May

English
1
0
8
1.7K
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@luckyjones14003 @wallstlobo @oneortwo1234 Yeah it’s likely to stay lateral or decline but it’s a very risky short; PM about NDA filed can come any week. Buy-out rumours (or actual bids) are not entirely unthinkable either. PM about NPDR/DME only needing one study.
English
0
0
3
54
luckyjones79
luckyjones79@luckyjones14003·
@RazBioTech @wallstlobo @oneortwo1234 Whatever they are doing, it’s not working. Not to be too critical, but there’s been a pretty steep decline, not to mention short interest is much higher. Shorts are pouncing because they know they can- similar to December.
English
2
0
1
82
oneortwo1234
oneortwo1234@oneortwo1234·
$OCUL 2 presentations tomorrow:Fireside Chat: 9:00 – 9:25 AM ET Presenter: Pravin U. Dugel, MD, Executive Chairman, President and CEO Location: Miami, FL Barclays 28th Annual Global Healthcare Conference: Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 Location: Miami, FL
English
1
0
3
475
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@wallstlobo @oneortwo1234 It’s because the study design is super strange and the regulatory path is novel. They need to educate. If you’re jaded you call it spinning, but I think they are doing a rather good job. Obviously biased and optimistic, but the plan resonates with me.
English
2
0
10
202
Fred Anthony
Fred Anthony@wallstlobo·
@oneortwo1234 $OCUL Not sure why Dugel is doing so many conferences 1, everyone knows the story 2. it's not helping the stock seems like a waste of his time
English
1
0
3
589
Fat Shot Drug
Fat Shot Drug@Biotech_FC·
@RazBioTech @twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 I was trying to say that if the SOL-1 design was acceptable under a SPA that unless they had a major safety issue, SOL-1 would likely be sufficient for approval given the outcome of their meeting. They incorporated re-dosing into SOL-1 which was necessary for approval IMO
English
1
0
1
102
oneortwo1234
oneortwo1234@oneortwo1234·
$ocul "We’re in a different orbit altogether. We're not talking about an extra week or 2 weeks. We're talking about a drug that will allow patients, two-thirds of patients, to be rescue-free up to almost a year." retinalphysician.com/issues/2026/ma…
English
2
1
15
964
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@Biotech_FC @twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 That’s not the issue. The spa was awarded at a time when the filing package would include both studies. FDA now says in some cases 1 study is enough. The question is not if the spa is valid, the question is does it allow them to file on Sol-1 only? It was designed as part of pack
English
1
0
2
97
Fat Shot Drug
Fat Shot Drug@Biotech_FC·
@RazBioTech @twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 The SPA doesn’t guarantee approval on SOL-1 and the FDA can always change their mind. I think a glaring safety issue was the major risk here not efficacy in SOL-1. It follows the guidelines for demonstrating superiority directly from the FDA.
English
1
0
1
61
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 The SPA is still the strongest answer: FDA pre-blessed this comparator. But you’re right that SOL-1 alone doesn’t show head-to-head vs. q8w Eylea. That’s a legitimate open question until SOL-R reads out.
English
1
0
2
92
twotreesinthecenter
twotreesinthecenter@twotreesthere·
@RazBioTech @oneortwo1234 "Forget [SOL-1's] control arm" indeed! Yes, OTX-TKI seems active, but has it shown a comparable (visual acuity maintenance) efficacy relative to the approved SOC at 6, 9, 12 months, with its proposed dosing, i.e. single dose? not yet.
English
1
0
0
74
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 You’re doing it again - comparing rescue-free durability (65.9%) to VA maintenance under continuous treatment (95%) — those (still) aren’t the same metric. FDA said; design your superiority ph3 like this. With this primary endpoint. Measured like this. They did. FDA gave SPA.
English
1
0
3
79
twotreesinthecenter
twotreesinthecenter@twotreesthere·
@RazBioTech @oneortwo1234 $OCUL claimed that 21.7% difference (65.9-44.2 single dose Eylea) is highly statistically-significant. How about a 29.1% (=95% Eylea 2mg per label-65.9% single dose of OTX-TKI)?
twotreesinthecenter tweet mediatwotreesinthecenter tweet media
English
6
0
1
392
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 No not vs anything. Forget the control arm. Just look at the active arm. At 6, 9 & 12 months. Is the drug active? Yes it is. Also got SPA. Supports NDA. SOL-R axpaxli will show noninferiority at 6 months dosed ONCE against 2mg Eylea dosed every 8 weeks. HD arm is masking only.
English
1
0
1
89
twotreesinthecenter
twotreesinthecenter@twotreesthere·
@RazBioTech @oneortwo1234 "unprecedented duration" [vs a single dose of Eylea 2mg] is meaningless. Without SOL-R (non-inferior in efficacy) results, which studies Axpaxli Q24W vs. Eylea 2mg per label & Eylea 8mg Q24W [underdosed], how does SOL-1 data alone support a NDA? Q52W?
English
1
0
0
90
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 ?? The SOL-1 data is released. Look at the data. Axpaxli has unprecedented duration. The claim is right there.
English
1
0
3
94
twotreesinthecenter
twotreesinthecenter@twotreesthere·
@RazBioTech @oneortwo1234 $OCUL's claim of Axpaxli's 6-12 months duration is solely based on pre-clinical data, as SOL-1 used a different dosage/formulation than what was used in p1, and the company skipped p2.
English
2
0
2
388
Rasmus H
Rasmus H@RazBioTech·
@twotreesthere @oneortwo1234 You’re comparing rescue-free durability (65.9%) to VA maintenance under continuous treatment (95%) — those aren’t the same metric. Non-inferiority (and superiority) can’t be reduction in treatment burden. What’s your read on the primary BCVA endpoint?
English
1
0
0
64
twotreesinthecenter
twotreesinthecenter@twotreesthere·
@RazBioTech @oneortwo1234 Is Axpaxli's 65.9% (visual acuity maintenance) efficacy at week 52 non-inferior to Eylea 2mg per label's 95% at week 52? At what dosing schedule can Axpaxli show a 95% efficacy at week 52? The answer: NOT a single dose, probably not ever.
English
2
0
0
128