Did Frequency Therapeutics claim FX-322 improved hearing thresholds before?They can only really claim improvements that they have data for. So far, it's word score measures.
Did Frequency Therapeutics claim FX-322 improved hearing thresholds before?They can only really claim improvements that they have data for. So far, it's word score measures.
They had shown the small handful (I think 3 or 4?) of patients that sustained a threshold improvement of 10 dB+ at 8 kHz on the audiogram. However, those outcomes at the group-level are not statistically significant, so that is why they do not make the claim.Did Frequency Therapeutics claim FX-322 improved hearing thresholds before?
Help me understand this, did the results get better, worse, or stay the same? What's the outcome?Notes from the Goldman Q&A today:
Overview:
- Over 200 patients + data points have received FX-322
- Largest known database of patients receiving a treatment for hearing loss
Phase 2A details:
- Plan to disclose in 2H/2021
The two Phase 1Bs had the same outcomes for similar hearing loss levels.Help me understand this, did the results get better, worse, or stay the same? What's the outcome?
Not much new...Help me understand this, did the results get better, worse, or stay the same? What's the outcome?
The webcasts are always available to listen to after the event if you go to their website.Anyone record this latest event? I missed it.
Probably like $60,000.Any ideas how much FX-322 would cost if you don't have insurance?
Is there a possibility of early July for Phase 2A details?So, now we wait until August/September?
Awesome summary. Thank you.Notes from the Goldman Q&A today:
Overview:
- Over 200 patients + data points have received FX-322
- Largest known database of patients receiving a treatment for hearing loss
Phase 2A details:
- Plan to disclose in 2H/2021
Phase 1B studies (ARHL/severe):
- Exploratory focus to understand patient populations for future Phase 2/3 design
- All have lead-in measures to eliminate bias seen in Phase 2A
Specific patient etiologies that appear to be best candidate to respond to drug with single dose:
- Moderate -> Moderately Severe hearing loss (Severe TBD)
- Permanent NIHL or SSNHL
- Association with a noise trauma
- Analysis of 200+ patient database is ongoing to better define makeup of responders for inclusion in future trials
What to expect from future Phase 2/3 design:
- Lead-in period with multiple baseline measures
- Focus on single dose
- Speech perception
- Using other long-term measures not currently used in trials (didn't disclose what those are)
On expanding the Hearing Program and team:
- Continued support from Langer + Board + Clinical advisory panel to proceed with FX-322 single dose trials
- Continued support from external experts and consultants in the field
- Two studies that show signal are enough to proceed - "No doubt they should expand clinical trial."
- Continuing to expand Frequency team focusing on Drug Delivery + Audiology
ENT/audiologist/community awareness:
- Many are following work closely
- Shift to useage in the clinical setting is a focus of the firm
- They are still working on creating inroads with Audiologist field
- Voice of patient is becoming front-and-center
Other hearing related PCA approach efforts:
- Other efforts in-discovery in the hearing program (TBD: 2H/2021)
- Focusing on other pathways+Drug delivery
R&D Day is 2H/2021? Assuming this will be like Tesla Battery Day?
Capital to fund the firm:
- Have 2 years of cash
- Can still get cash payment milestones from Astellas
- May leverage dilution to get additional funding if needed
This makes my eyes roll. "Other long-term measures" like, maybe, um... an audiogram? You know, the go-to metrics for audiologists to determine how well you hear??? Is that too much to ask?
- Using other long-term measures not currently used in trials (didn't disclose what those are)
I'm not sure what you mean? Audiogram is being used in all the trials. So measures other than audiogram are in consideration for these other Phase 2 trials. No follow up question was asked on this during the Q&A.This makes my eyes roll. "Other long-term measures" like, maybe, um... an audiogram? You know, the go-to metrics for audiologists to determine how well you hear??? Is that too much to ask?
View attachment 45294
This avoidance of audiograms as a metric is my #1 red-flag for this company.
They're beating around the bush because they know that audiograms will show little to no hearing improvement (extended audiogram or no).
You never ever complete your thoughts. It's like right when the critical thinking stage starts, you peace out.This makes my eyes roll. "Other long-term measures" like, maybe, um... an audiogram? You know, the go-to metrics for audiologists to determine how well you hear??? Is that too much to ask?
View attachment 45294
This avoidance of audiograms as a metric is my #1 red-flag for this company.
They're beating around the bush because they know that audiograms will show little to no hearing improvement (extended audiogram or no).
You might need word score improvements to hear "audiogram" and know that you won. But we wouldn't want that, as it would be bargaining...Every single time...
What I see here is someone giving a company trying to survive wwwwaaaayyyy too much benefit of the doubt and ascribing too much good-faith.Do you think Robert fucking Langer...
You never ever complete your thoughts. It's like right when the critical thinking stage starts, you peace out.
Ask yourself this. What do you want achieved by the company ignoring other metrics? Do you think that Will McLean and Robert Langer are scam artists? Do you think McLean sits in the lab and goes "No! I don't want audiogram improvements. That would be horrible. Fuck man, I had goals, but an improved audiogram is just too rich for my blood"?
Or is it more likely that he's shooting for audiogram improvements, but will be happy for the drug to succeed on some level so that he can get the drug to market, obtain more funding, and, in turn, help you get your sexy audiograms?
Do you think Robert fucking Langer advises this situation and says "Whatever you do, no audiograms"?
Holy shit man, science is hard. It really is. You think these additional metrics are some sort of grand cover up or something. It's the total opposite. They are introducing them out of competency.
Can you please explain to me where I am incorrectly interpreting your posts? Where is the value in saying audiograms or bust?
Frequency Therapeutics are just trying to make the best of what they have got. As we have mentioned, at this point their plan is to just go to market with what they have so that the company doesn't go bankrupt. Maybe in time they can figure out why FX-322 didn't work as intended and improve on it. I think we can all agree on this point.What I see here is someone giving a company trying to survive wwwwaaaayyyy too much benefit of the doubt and ascribing too much good-faith.
Try to look at it from the vantage point of those with hearing damage, not the corporate board. Patients judging this treatment are going to want to see improvements in the audiogram before anything else.
View attachment 45302
The omission of the audiogram to the point of not even including the word is suspicious in the extreme. It's trying to steer and spin around a lack of efficacy. You may not want to see that, but that's how it is to anyone who hasn't decided for whatever reason to circle wagons around FREQ.
Seems like you're following FREQ verrrrrry closely for someone who doesn't believe in it.What I see here is someone giving a company trying to survive wwwwaaaayyyy too much benefit of the doubt and ascribing too much good-faith.
Try to look at it from the vantage point of those with hearing damage, not the corporate board. Patients judging this treatment are going to want to see improvements in the audiogram before anything else.
View attachment 45302
The omission of the audiogram to the point of not even including the word is suspicious in the extreme. It's trying to steer and spin around a lack of efficacy. You may not want to see that, but that's how it is to anyone who hasn't decided for whatever reason to circle wagons around FREQ.
True or false.What I see here is someone giving a company trying to survive wwwwaaaayyyy too much benefit of the doubt and ascribing too much good-faith.
Try to look at it from the vantage point of those with hearing damage, not the corporate board. Patients judging this treatment are going to want to see improvements in the audiogram before anything else.
View attachment 45302
The omission of the audiogram to the point of not even including the word is suspicious in the extreme. It's trying to steer and spin around a lack of efficacy. You may not want to see that, but that's how it is to anyone who hasn't decided for whatever reason to circle wagons around FREQ.
They made the first airplane after many failed attempts and now they have fighter jets that can break the sound barrier. After FX-322 is released maybe one day they'll be able to make a better version that restores 90% of hearing with one dose.To use an analogy:
Just because this flying test failed... it does not mean they give up and stop trying. Understanding how their invention works and reacts under certain conditions is key... and even if it does fly and succeeds in "crossing the ocean"... the first iteration will always be far removed from the luxurious airplanes we have today...
Of course FX-322 may not work in the end, but even then it will be important step in the learning process... and an important step towards others "crossing the ocean" one day...
That's the way I try to look at it at least.
Failing for Success: The Wright Brothers
FX-322 has already restored hair cells in donated cochlea. I would say that's enough to have some faith in the drug.What I see here is someone giving a company trying to survive wwwwaaaayyyy too much benefit of the doubt and ascribing too much good-faith.
Try to look at it from the vantage point of those with hearing damage, not the corporate board. Patients judging this treatment are going to want to see improvements in the audiogram before anything else.
View attachment 45302
The omission of the audiogram to the point of not even including the word is suspicious in the extreme. It's trying to steer and spin around a lack of efficacy. You may not want to see that, but that's how it is to anyone who hasn't decided for whatever reason to circle wagons around FREQ.
Sh*t, if it's safe and doesn't do anything, I'll take it. Can't be that much different than the TRU NIAGEN sitting in the back of my drawer.FX-322 is safe, demonstrated efficacy in earlier studies (single dose) and fulfills an unmet need.
ENTs have nothing for the inner ear. Steroids (maybe they work? nobody knows) for hearing loss; that's it. Like it or not; FX-322 is going to market. And truth be told it's better than the present options: nothing.
Maybe FX-322 regenerates hair cells but they aren't connected to synapses properly? I don't know. But I would put money FX-322 (and many others) will be going to market as there are no other treatments available and anything that shows an ounce of promise is going to make it through. Additionally it might only be good for young people, or cancer survivors, and not sufferers of presbycusis or people who don't have cochlear supporting cells intact. I don't know, but it probably won't work for everyone. And as we know the ear heals notoriously slowly. Even in birds the regeneration process takes many months. I would like to see the audiogram follow ups from many months later.
There isn't going to be a magic treatment that cures hearing loss for all. Different drugs will work for different purposes. Someone who lost hearing from an IED explosion will require different treatment approaches than someone who was born congenitally deaf or lost their hearing from presbycusis.