uchi_wawa

@TTRAmyloid @MelvinRiskMgmt How much money has been lost on biotech bets made while drunk on fantasies “IF this hits…”? Biotech got a lot better for me when I focused on stories featuring more “whens”, than “ifs”. IE “when $TGTX & $DCTH turn profitable…” (obvious near term events, last year)

@STL_Biotech The signal seems consistent at each read, with safety either consistent or trending better as they implement prophylaxis. Do you feel like its a viable drug? Does share price reflect uncertainty or lack of catalysts? Data on remaining p1 pts this summer? $CTMX

Thought that given ctmx MC and mCRC landscape would be good for +50-75% Even worse, added a bit post data. Then raise was shit. And focus on pivotal more cautions than I expected. Still small position but yikes, apperently took uneccesary risk AND brought cost basis up.🤮

$CTMX Properly humbled on this one.. Pretty deep dive, plenty of risk but my gut said first cut was a real signal, expected drop in response but still >/= 20% and safety to be unpleasant but manageable. Sized small but got the binary right, pretty much my base case.

@Biomaven Of the $38M repo'd, roughly half went to the CEO. Surely there was stock comp to others too. Share repos can be great. $TGTX share repos are "roughly half" great ("ok-ish"?), so far. ir.tgtherapeutics.com/static-files/c… x.com/zipjet/status/…

So pretty clear that $TGTX will be dramatically increasing their share repurchases. They just borrowed $500m net (with option for another $250m) at very favorable terms. They are already cash flow positive, and they just increased the amount they can repurchase from $100m to $300m. So far they have only repurchased some $38m at a price under $29. Leveraging up like this absolutely makes sense given they can confidently predict sales and cashflow steadily increasing for several years to come. At some point ever-increasing EPS will drive their stock price higher, and this extra leverage will amplify that process. Companies with an ATM program tend to cap their stock price - any pop and they sell shares. By contrast companies with an active repurchase program provide a floor for the stock price - they will generally buy on any weakness.

@realchinesespy @bingbingbom I massage the sides of the bridge of my nose with my pointer and thumb. 94% success rate

@bingbingbom i find its easiest to stop a sneeze by just exhaling all your air you have in your lungs, its like unloading a gun before it fires

when i sneeze i hold it in , even when alone when other people sneeze they let it out why is that?

@bingbingbom @realchinesespy My son sneezed directly into my face when he was ~18 hours old. Point blank range. I took it as an affirmation his pneumothorax healed & lungs were operational. One of the happiest moments ever. That said, my mouth was closed (but eyes open!)

@realchinesespy Ty I’ll try that , I’ve also never had someone sneeze directly into my mouth but something to consider as well

@PersimmonTI Did they explicitly estimate the Q1 readout would be ~80 patients? Efficacy in liver mets seems especially relevant. Following $DCTH, they (obviously) emphasize the importance & difficulty in treating those. 3/3 resp @10mg incl liver. $CTMX

$CTMX I'm bullish on the upcoming Phase 1 dose expansion readout for Varsetatug masetecan (Varseta-M), an EpCAM PROBODY Topo-1 ADC for colorectal cancer (mCRC). But that's not to say that the readout, anticipated/speculated to accompany $CTMX Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Earnings Call pre-market this Monday, March 16, 2026, is without risks. All of the same risks I've previously referenced (see retweet, below) continue to apply, and perhaps in greater measure now, given $CTMX somewhat elevated market cap. Small N data in oncology, in a heretofore very difficult histology, with some potential safety/tolerability concerns, and from a company with a history of clinical candidates that’ve disappointed after initial promise. Be clear eyed about these risks, because you CAN lose, even with a full heart. Now then, on with it: The Problem We know that chemotherapy can be effective in eradicating cancer cells, but the problem -- unchecked and unguided, chemo can eradicate everything else, too, including healthy tissue. So, the question is, how can we get a chemo "payload" to kill just the tumor, limiting collateral damage to healthy cells as much as possible. Antibody Drug Conjugates (ADCs), such as Varseta-M, have been biopharma's elegant solution -- in many ways, ADCs are nothing more than targeted chemotherapy: the antibody is the "homing missile," the targeting moiety, which is linked, via "linker," to the cytotoxic chemo “payload.” But ADCs succeed or fail based on how effectively, and how safely, they can accomplish their mission -- all the "efficacy" in the world doesn't matter if a patient can't tolerate the therapy because of severe toxicities caused by chemo run amok. A long (and overly basic, I'm sure) preamble about ADCs, but there's a reason for it. If we apply this ADC rationale to Varseta-M, we can see that it's working (pretty much) exactly as intended -- and it's doing it via $CTMX antibody-masking technology. The Target Varseta-M targets EpCAM, or Epitheleal Cell Adhesion Molecule. And as that name implies, it's a near universal target because the epithelium is near universal throughout our bodies' protective/connective inner-lining. EpCAM’s ubiquity has been both blessing and curse. To the drug hunter, EpCAM is attractive because of how broadly it’s expressed, and overexpressed, in a range of cancer histologies – and perhaps in CRC most of all. In fact, there have been intriguing proof points of locally administered EpCAM targeting therapies that have shown efficacy. So we know that the target "works." But how do you target tumor EpCAM selectively, using systemic therapy, without harming the many other healthy tissue types that also express EpCAM? The Systemic Proof Point In many ways, Varseta-M’s early data from Phase 1 dose escalation released on 5/12/25 already show that $CTMX has answered the previously unsolvable equation of systemic EpCAM targeting, with a 28% confirmed response rate from unselected patients across doses prioritized for expansion (7.2, 8.6 and 10 mg/kg Q3W). Surely small N data, but a couple of additional points: 1) The meaningful differentiation to the current standard of care in 3L+ CRC make it highly probable that these early Varseta-M data are not a fluke. The 3L+ CRC indication is unfortunately quite large – greater than 35,000 U.S. patients – and it’s also unfortunately poorly served, with currently used treatments with ORRs of 2%, 1% and 6%, and with median PFS marks that range from 2 months to 5.6 months. With a currently observed 28% ORR, and a preliminary PFS of 5.8 months (as of the 4/7/25 data cutoff), Varseta-M could be reasonably thought to have a meaningful margin of safety on efficacy – even with a significant diminution in efficacy on the expansion data, as long as PFS remains relatively strong (remember, 5.8 months PFS is yet immature), Varseta-M could be a multi-billion dollar molecule in 3L+ CRC, alone. 2) Beyond just the numbers, it’s the nature of those numbers. Referring to the $CTMX waterfall slide, we can see that the 28% ORR thus far achieved by Varseta-M is further bolstered by both depth and consistency of activity. With a disease control rate of 94%, only one patient experienced progressive disease. And 14 of 18 patients saw tumor regression of some kind. For the responders, we see depth of response, with the deepest partial response nearing 100% tumor regression – and this from a patient with 10 prior lines of systemic therapy, and with KRAS mutation. And the waterfall slide also indicates early signs of durability, with 10 of 18 patients remaining on study treatment as of the data cutoff, including 3/5 of the responders, and 5 other patients who had achieved some tumor regression but short of RECIST response. The potential is there for these tumor regressions to further deepen into RECIST response. But perhaps more importantly, such sustained activity, keeping progressive disease at bay, would only add to the PFS benefit seen from Varseta-M. Masking and Unmasking The only way that Varseta-M could be working is because $CTMX antibody-masking technology is working. By masking/cloaking the EpCAM antibody in its travel throughout the body, only to be unmasked by proteases only present in the CRC tumor microenvironment, Varseta-M is achieving systemically administered tumor-selective EpCAM targeting. Again, this is the only way that it could be happening – Varseta-M is working exactly as it was intended. Safety – of Diarrhea and Colitis @anthonystaj posted brilliantly about his theories as to the etiology of Varseta-M’s lone outlier toxicity, diarrhea and gastrointestinal issues. His theory of lack of glucoronidation seems plausible, and as of the most recent firesides, it seems that $CTMX management has not solved the puzzle of etiology. My guess is that the majority of the toxicity is payload related, but with a small portion related to some off-tumor EpCAM targeting in the GI tract. I also guess that such toxicities will continue to be manageable, particularly with prophylactic measures now in place. Late-line mCRC is probably the setting in which such toxicities will be most magnified, as the tumor is located within the GI, and late-line patients may have GI tracts which are in poor condition both because of many prior lines of therapy as well as the cancer itself. So, if Varseta-M can pass the safety gauntlet here, it could bode well for both earlier lines of mCRC (having seen fewer damaging prior treatments) as well as other, non GI histologies. The Final Word on What We Could See $CTMX management has been clear about a couple of things for this Monday’s expansion readout: 1) the ORR of each expansion dose, 7.2, 8.6 and 10 mg/kg will be broken out separately. 2) the interim mPFS of each expansion dose will be broken out separately. And CEO has indicated that these mPFS numbers should prove to be very useful in investors understanding of Varseta-M’s clinical benefit profile. I think this could be pretty telling. Take another look at that dose escalation waterfall slide… At highest dose, 10 mg/kg, ORR is 43% (3/7). But beyond ORR, take a look at the dark green bars in totality. Yes, the group also includes the only progressive disease patient, but two of the three responders at 10 mg show significant depth of response by tumor regression. Remember, $CTMX upsized the expansion cohort from the originally planned 75 to 100, and they will present data from around 80 patients on Monday. How many of the 80 will be at 10 mg/kg?

@VeraGavrilovna @lady_valor_07 ...and dont fold 'em. Have a clean bin and and dirty bin. Use the clean ones without care & toss em in the dirty bin. Wash and repeat.

@lady_valor_07 stop buying paper towels. buy cheap white terry-cloth bath cloths. they do all clean-up beautifully and can be bleached. one pack costs 15 bucks, lasts 2-3 years.

I’m 25. Give me oddly specific life tips. No general ”surround yourself with positive people” tips. I want the most random, specific advice possible.

@monaco_biotech @vinidrea What are the precedents? Drone-enforced control of the oil supply seems like a unique new twist. Stalemate in Ukraine suggests it can last awhile. Maybe the global will is more aligned to open the straits? Or not?

@vinidrea I expect it to take months.

What I'm not reading at the moment are posts from biotech investors who are still discussing certain names today as if nothing were wrong or happened, even though a crash cannot be ruled out tomorrow. This is not a hiccup! Oh yes, there were also those musicians on the Titanic who played until the bitter end. Don't be like that. You can't be so out of touch with reality. I'll go even further and say: Unfollow these people, because they don't know when real danger is looming. You can't expect anything good for your investment from people like that, except that they are trying to pump their bags until the very bitter end. Absolute red flag 🚩🚩🚩 Stay safe and good luck for tomorrow.

@JoseRestonVA @MysteriousMole1 Were you able to hear his presentation? Anything new, or new impressions? I dont see it on $CTMX 's site. Do you know if its available? Thank you!

@MysteriousMole1 Maybe no data is released, but he will still talk. And if he is hedging further on safety…that to me would be useful info.

@john_hersc79276 @plainyogurt21 Is it really only 10%? My only credible data point is an older mom who has a *lot* of health issues. Yet only the eyelea injections cause psych trauma. Saw estimates 40% skip treatments, albeit from $OCUL mgmnt. Really appreciate your balanced & informative posts

@plainyogurt21 I can see it being a niche use case for ~10% of patients that simply won't come in more than once every 12 or 18 months. But before this read out you could see a universe where this thing did 10B/yr some day. Now... 1B/yr would be a win.

$OCUL will be approved but there's very little argument to make this a 3B+ therapy at the moment. closer to a niche use case. Imagine if th ecomp was vabysmo or Eylea HD? I'm surprised the 75% rescue free rate from Axpax more than the 50% rescue free rate form Eylea. The PK profile should have showed us something different. Net net: Bullish KLRS and KOD, Bearish EYPT. As I do think this puts the TKI thesis on a little shaky ground. However, with approval and expected durability arguments, they still could have a drug. Perhaps a future dumpster dive.

@Medtechgur23109 @jud_guy @mike98572986 In a recent earnings call (2025 H2 ish), the $DCTH CEO specifically mentioned clinical trials as a significant source of competition for patients. IIRC there was a follow up Q from analysts trying to quantify the impact.

@jud_guy @mike98572986 One thing that I heard is holding DCTH back is doing HEPZATO first will exclude patients from getting on current clinical trials for Uveal Melanoma Mets. So oncologist are encouraging patients to look at trials first and holding Hepzato back until progression.

$Dcth presentation today, didn’t see the whole presentation, things I heard 4-6 procedures per month for Dr padia, 68 procedures so far in about 28-29 patients. First procedure he did was April 10 24. Says he is booked for February and March, his backlog isn’t insane anymore due to more and more centers opening on the West Coast. Seemed to imply they definitely could do more than 4-6 per month but at the end of the day they need room time and that is about what works best for the center right now. Sites are openly rapidly quote

@john_hersc79276 @Biomaven @plainyogurt21 @houndcl Thanks

@uchi_wawa @Biomaven @plainyogurt21 @houndcl One assumes, though I haven't seen that confirmed publicly and not on ct.gov Logically, would expect it to be part of alpha controlled endpoints and those are typically material. So I would be surprised to not see it part of topline

1 of the 2 critical $OCUL results is [prob] a 2nd EP: “change from baseline BCVA, axpax arm” PR suggests we may not even get that Tuesday. True? @john_hersc79276 @Biomaven @plainyogurt21 @houndcl

@Andre_AGTC @zipjet @Biomaven @semodough "no reasonable explanation why liver enzymes are affected by BTK inhibitor" The clinical data disagrees.

@zipjet @Biomaven @semodough You are missing the key point There is no reasonable explanation why liver enzymes are affected by BTK inhibitor. Are you aware of any? It means that if you don't develop problems, you will never develop one Could be a genetic predisposition

$RHHBY Fenebrutinib - the FIC in multiple sclerosis. Oral, brain-penetrant BTK inhibitor for PPMS and relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) - good data compared to IV CD20 OCREVUS Good news for $NRIX Not a good one for $TGTX

@zipjet @richtrades100 $OCUL 's recent high was an artifact of FDA clownery and, like the recent noise, irrelevant. x.com/uchi_wawa/stat…

@richtrades100 The high for $OCUL was early December, not January. Hit 16.44

Gossip $ocul drop means something when you have big profitable names dropping 18-20%, probably, some of the most viscous selloffs since last March. $ocul guide for data ‘early feb’ I would take a guess on a PR this Fri, for Mon readout. Have until 15th Feb, my view of early

@PreciseSVJ @jfais20 Do you have a take on CX-2051, while we are here? Thoughts on whether the expanded cohorts will continue to show good results?

$DCTH- a good example of having this LT visibility Valued at just 4x 2025 sales. Paid down the debt, buying back shares Pricing pressure for Hepzato & seasonality = near-term noise & nothing more Practice-changing results from CHOPIN to accelerate uptake in docs who don't want to postpone systemic treatment/ICI Expanding into other solid tumors with liver involvement, starting with breast & CRC. Steady stream of data once you hit 2027 (interim CRC then breast), primary CRC readout in 2028 & primary breast readout in 2029 (full OS in 2030). Additional indications to be pursued as sales ramp & funding obtained (ICC, melanoma, NSCLC, etc)

@PreciseSVJ @jfais20 "...bear". Totally appreciate the exchange! TY! I keep returning to "WhyTF are they stuck at 2 procedures/site/mo" Hopefully it's a demand thing that CHOPIN ameliorates. Other possibility is procedure complexity, and that seems a much harder fix. Mgmnt suggested both.

@PreciseSVJ @jfais20 Will take your word for it on pricing. But that puzzle is a few years out, depending on the mCRC & mBC trials. They can grow the company a lot by expanding* w/in mUM until then. * I hope. I'm a little worried about scaling sites & procedures per site.

@PreciseSVJ @jfais20 Like, the 8 patients above actually represent ~1% of $DCTH 's current supply capacity...but maybe .01%* of the unmet need?

@PreciseSVJ @jfais20 $DCTH 's limit is supply, not demand. “Liver mets” is not close to being a solved problem. No demand shortage, esp beyond mUM. OTOH, site scaling & procedure complexity limit supply to < 1000 procedures annually. 40* sites x 2 proc/mo x 12mo = 960 *Aspirational 2026 goal

@PreciseSVJ @jfais20 I can't count, but the point stands. 8 of 12 didn't respond.

@PreciseSVJ @jfais20 Specifically in that data set, 8 of the 10 patients with liver mets did not respond. (long both fwiw)