CR

Own-Recipe5908

That's the Honda CR-V nowadays.

kbeks

I’m confused. Deeply. I think maybe you are too. The crisis in December is the end of the extension of the federal budget, not the debt ceiling or any other such issue. We’ve had the market actually gain during a government shutdown, they happen so often that they are rote and ineffective until congressmen actually have to stand in a TSA line and then suddenly they start negotiating in good faith. But regardless, if the republicans manage to get their members in line and push a CR or reconciliation budget bill over the line, the non-crisis crisis goes away. There is no drama until January, when the new congress is sworn in and the impeachments begin. But none of that is AI oversight, which was the original assertion. That democratic wins would trigger congressional oversight of AI. Which it won’t, but even if it did, that wouldn’t actually happen until mid 2027. What triggering event do you see in December for all this to come to a head?

Alpha_Delta_Bravo

There is definitely a range but you are right about some. In CR, oncology is one of the most complex areas to work in because timelines and milestones are so tight. GBM is a real bitch to treat and research for that reason.

LegitosaurusRex

I think it's mostly about it being at $1.2B which is very high for a company with no revenue, so that means investors are counting on a high chance for it to be successful. Obviously if everything goes great it'll be worth more, but the current price is discounted based on the risk that things don't go well. Here's it's analysis: **TL;DR:** I checked each claim against Alpha Tau's filings, press releases, and the trial registry. The Japan approval and the pipeline catalysts check out. The FDA claim doesn't: the pivotal trial hasn't reported, and the company guides top-line data to late 2026 or early 2027. At ~$1.26B with no product revenue, the stock already prices in a lot of success ahead of that readout. *Price as of Oct 14, 2026 (intraday); financials as of June 30, 2026. Not financial advice.* --- ## Claim-by-claim | Claim in the post | Verdict | |---|---| | "Pre revenue with a pre revenue market cap" | Half true | | cSCC "market penetration estimated at $3.5B+" | No source found | | FDA approval "pretty much a done deal… early in the year at the latest" | Unsupported | | "Basically 100% ORR and a high CR % with no significant side effects" | Misleading | | Japan market authorization for H&N cancer | True | | "Negotiating pricing with the Japanese government as we speak" | Partly true | | Japan sales in 2026, early 2027 at the latest | No guidance supports it | | GBM: KOLs believe it "will become the standard of care" | No support found | | GBM results "this quarter" | Roughly matches guidance | | More catalysts (pancreas, prostate) | True | | "Fully commercial" in 2027 | Unsupported | ## Details **1. Pre-revenue market cap: half true.** Revenue is zero. The market cap is ~$1.26B (92.33M shares at ~$13.61), and the stock trades near the top of its 52-week range ($3.43–$15.79). That valuation already assumes a lot goes right. **2. "$3.5B+" cSCC market: no source found.** I couldn't find this figure in Alpha Tau's filings or releases. The pivotal trial also enrolls a narrow group: recurrent cSCC that has failed standard therapy, not a candidate for surgery or standard radiation, a single lesion up to 7 cm, and no nodal or distant spread. A first approval would be based on that population. **3. FDA "done deal": unsupported.** Alpha DaRT has Breakthrough Device Designation for recurrent cSCC, and Alpha Tau filed the first module of a modular PMA in January 2026. That module couldn't include pivotal results: the 88-patient ReSTART trial finished enrolling in May 2026, and the company guides top-line data to late 2026 or early 2027. ClinicalTrials.gov (last updated June 2026) lists estimated primary completion as April 2027. The clinical module needs that data, and FDA's review comes after. Breakthrough designation speeds up interaction with FDA; it doesn't guarantee approval. **4. "~100% ORR, no significant side effects": misleading.** No ReSTART efficacy or safety data has been released. The recent "100% ORR" headline comes from a different study: Alpha DaRT plus pembrolizumab in head-and-neck cancer, 9 evaluable patients (4 complete, 5 partial responses). Earlier skin-cancer results come from smaller pilot studies, and Alpha Tau's own risk factors note that preliminary data may not predict final results. Treating pilot-stage results as proof the pivotal will succeed is what makes the claim misleading. **5. Japan approval: true.** Japan's MHLW approved Alpha DaRT in February 2026 for unresectable locally advanced or locally recurrent head and neck cancer, the company's first approval outside Israel. HekaBio leads commercialization, and a post-marketing surveillance study is required. **6. Japan pricing: partly true.** In March 2026, management said reimbursement discussions with MHLW were starting, including the possibility of reimbursement during the post-marketing surveillance period. I couldn't find an announced reimbursement price as of mid-October. **7. Japan sales timing: no guidance supports it.** Alpha Tau hasn't guided Japan revenue. Management sized the approved population at a few hundred to a few thousand patients a year, so Japan sales would be modest even once they start. **8. GBM "standard of care": no support found.** REGAIN is a 10-patient U.S. feasibility trial. Interim data on the first 3 patients (cutoff May 3, 2026): 2 complete responses, 1 stable disease with a 30% tumor reduction, and one grade-3 serious adverse event that resolved with steroids. FDA cleared enrollment of the last 7 patients in June. Encouraging for three patients, but I couldn't find any KOL statement that it will become standard of care. **9. GBM results "this quarter": roughly matches guidance.** The company guides additional REGAIN data by around the end of 2026. That overlaps Q4 but isn't a firm date. **10. Other catalysts: true.** The IMPACT pancreatic pilot finished enrolling Aug 31, 2026, with initial data targeted for late 2026 or early 2027. A pooled analysis presented at ASCO 2026 reported 11.2-month median overall survival in metastatic pancreatic cancer after first-line chemo; the company compares that with roughly 4–6 months for second-line chemo in historical data (not a head-to-head trial). The first U.S. prostate pilot patient is expected in H2 2026, and Tolmar has U.S. commercialization rights for prostate. **11. "Fully commercial" in 2027: unsupported.** That requires FDA approval and a U.S. launch. Neither is assured, and the timing depends on data that isn't out yet. ## Financial snapshot - **Market cap:** ~$1.26B at ~$13.61 (Oct 14 intraday), 92.33M shares - **Cash, deposits and restricted deposits:** $104.8M at June 30, 2026, up from $76.9M at Dec 31, 2025 - **H1 2026 operating loss:** $27.1M. Net loss was $68.8M, mostly from $41.4M of net financial expense driven by remeasuring the warrant liability as the stock rose (non-cash). - **Runway:** no date given. At H1's operating-loss pace, cash covers about two years (rough proxy: operating loss includes non-cash stock comp and excludes capex for the planned U.S. plant). - **Dilution:** shares outstanding rose 4.9% in H1 (88.01M → 92.33M). Public warrants (DRTSW) are outstanding, and exercises add shares. - **Tolmar deal (June 2026):** $20M equity at $11.99/share (25% premium to the 30-day VWAP), $15M toward a new U.S. production facility, up to $96.5M in development/regulatory milestones and up to $65M in commercial milestones for the first indication. Alpha Tau supplies product at 60% of net sales, subject to adjustments. - **Analysts:** 5, consensus Buy, average target $17.80 ## What to watch 1. **ReSTART top-line (late 2026 or early 2027).** Single-arm, open-label, 88 patients. Co-primary endpoints: confirmed objective response rate and duration of response 6 months after first response. Judge the readout against those, not against pilot numbers. 2. **REGAIN GBM update** (around end of 2026) 3. **IMPACT pancreatic initial data** (late 2026 or early 2027) 4. **Japan reimbursement listing** (no price announced yet) 5. **Q3 report** (estimated Nov 19, 2026) ## Bull vs. bear **Bull:** ReSTART hits both endpoints with clean safety, the PMA gets completed and approved, Japan reimbursement comes through, REGAIN and IMPACT hold up with more patients, and Tolmar milestones bring in non-dilutive cash. **Bear:** ReSTART response rates land below the pilot numbers, FDA asks for more data or longer follow-up, or good-but-not-perfect data still hits a stock trading near its 52-week high. Warrant exercises and any future raises add shares. ## Sources - [Q2 2026 results and corporate update (SEC 6-K, Aug 10, 2026)](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1871321/000121390026087224/ea030079101ex99-3.htm) - [ReSTART pivotal trial on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05323253)](https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05323253) - [First PMA module submitted to FDA (Jan 2026)](https://www.biospace.com/press-releases/alpha-tau-submits-first-pre-market-approval-module-to-the-fda-for-alpha-dart-for-the-treatment-of-recurrent-cutaneous-squamous-cell-carcinoma-cscc) - [Japan marketing approval (Feb 2026)](https://www.alphatau.com/single-post/alpha-tau-medical-receives-japanese-marketing-approval-for-alpha-dart-in-unresectable-locally-advan) - [Management on Japan reimbursement and patient population (MarketBeat, Mar 2026)](https://www.marketbeat.com/instant-alerts/alpha-tau-medical-conference-japan-approval-rolling-fda-pma-and-big-2026-data-readouts-teased-2026-03-19/) - [REGAIN interim results and enrollment clearance (Jun 2026)](https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2026/06/11/3310444/0/en/Alpha-Tau-Receives-FDA-Clearance-to-Complete-Enrollment-in-REGAIN-Recurrent-Glioblastoma-Trial-and-Add-Two-U-S-Clinical-Sites-Early-Interim-Results-Showed-100-Local-Disease-Control.html) - [IMPACT enrollment complete (Aug 31, 2026)](https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2026/08/31/3353267/0/en/alpha-tau-completes-patient-enrollment-in-its-multicenter-impact-pancreatic-cancer-pilot-study-of-alpha-dart-following-strong-demand-and-multiple-expansions.html) - [Price, shares, analyst consensus (StockAnalysis)](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/drts/)

Historical_Bat4882

Look into it. They of course approach this methodically and with math. Yes, you can cover the tumors. It works on GBM well because it can be a big blob of a tumor and it’s easy to work with seeds. Nothing happens to the healthy tissue because they have a formula to avoid that. The CRs (and even the non-CR could still be a CR now we just don’t know, it was the most recent patient tbf and given time the tumor might disappear) were done by a safety and not an efficacy study, imagine the possibilities if you go all in on a tumor. Controlling a tumor locally on these kind of end-of-line patients that DRTS go for as a goal is great because if it works, other treatments can again or at that time be used. One fantastic and individual advantage of DRTS is that if it works, it will most probably work well with other treatments. I would also argue that destroying a tumor like that is not seen with drugs or not to the same level and also with many sideeffects without fail. This is physics, there shouldn’t be sideeffects like drugs cause, they will be different and I expect much milder.

musicandarts

The [trial was not designed](https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06910306?term=DaRT,%20Alpha%20Tau&rank=6) to measure efficacy. It is a ten patient trial. You are correct about CR. I presume it is response measured by local radiographic control, which I assume to be some control (no growth, reduction of growth within limits) when measured using radiography.

OBotB

Just a comment in case you might be mistaking CR for "Complete Remission" when it is actually "Complete Response" for the GBM safety trial. Complete Response is at that one point in time no cancer can be detected. Complete Remission is measured over a sustained amount of time, which has yet to pass. I adore DRTS, but do think it best to be explicitly clear when there is nuance like this. You mention Keytruda in the comment above but did not mention the very exciting other aspect of DRTS - by working against the tumors they make what are "cold"/invisible to Keytruda tumors into "hot"/visible ones. Thr ability to use DRTS with other treatments is very desirable. Keytruda is a massively used immunotherapy and the trial with DRTS made it effective in basically all tumors.

FOTW-Anton

They need more exciting athletes on their way up instead of fading athletes. Only Wemby and Alcaraz right now and neither are at the Jordan/CR7/Mbappe level.

bikkhu42

bro died like CR7

PlasticPreparation74

I was speaking strictly from NIKE perspective. Nobody is denying that Ronaldo is probably the most recognisable name on the planet right now, along with Messi. And Mbappe is pretty famous too. The entire world tunes into the World Cups, and Mbappe has scored 4 goals across 2 World Cup finals, including a hattrick. It’s safe to assume that he was world famous too, even if he is a step below CR7. But from Nike perspective, I don’t think CR7 has launched a line as culturally iconic as the Air Jordans.

lies_are_comforting

The CR7 brand will be as big as the Jordan brand for many, many years to come.

PlasticPreparation74

Nike stopped promoting Ronaldo since the last World Cup lmao in 2022. I don’t think he featured in any advert or got any signature boot until 4 years later. Even his Golden Scorpion boot was only worn for one game vs Colombia, till half time. Apparently CR7 himself doesn’t like the quality of the Nike signature boots lmao. There was some speculation during EURO 2024 where he exchanged his MDS 008 boots for Bruno’s.

NoDisk5699

Jordan is from the 90s lol and LeBron is nearing retirement and probably 1 of 2 basketball players than 90% of the world could name lol. CR7 is huge but again about to retire

Loightsout

CR7 isn’t retiring at the end of the year. He will play until the end of this season. So June 2027. He will extend if he scores less than the necessary 21 goals he still needs to reach 1000.

ThreeEyedRaver

He’s now their flagship. He’ll get the Ronaldo treatment when CR7 retires at the end of this year

yapyd

Jordan, LeBron and CR7 are probably bigger but still a silly argument

Few-Bee8995

CR

BagholderForLyfe

Been to CR and heard about Jaco, but never went. How's it looking over there?

geewillie

Houthis confirmed CR7 fans

Independent-Pack-304

Explain why the trial is ongoing 30+ months past final enrollment when studies released less than a month ago show 16mos for Bat in CR1. (Regal is CR2 with frailer patients) You will find 0 data new or old to support Bat causing patients to live this long. Of course there is still a slim chance Regal fails to pass primary endpoint but it is very low. Do some actual research

tirtakarta

What? They bought more trains from Siemens (CRH-3) compared to Kawasaki (CRH-2). You can see why CR400BF have their bullet aesthetic from Siemens Velaro.

fred_cheese

Realize too that a significant amount of American Honda Civics as well as the CR-V are made in Canada.

Emotional-Breath-838

Yeah. It’s $1.3B market cap. If they complete the rGBM trial and hit one or two more CR’s, they’ll be fast tracked for first line FDA approval and standard of care. Between now and the end of next month, I suspect they’ll be granted an IDE to test in combination with Keytruda, Merck’s $32B per year checkpoint inhibitor. That’s the same combo that sent Moderna through the roof. Alpha DaRTs solve checkpoint inhibitor’s biggest issue: it turns cold tumors hot. Keytruda doesn’t work on cold tumors. Alpha Tau is nearly ready for FDA cert for skin cancer and the Tolmar deal will rapidly commercialize prostate and bladder cancer. Given all this, what do you believe their market cap should be? I’ve got it pegged around $20B if all of it hits. That’s almost 20x higher from the current price.

Ethanop1a

>The evaluation is not that complex. CR2(?) is granted but they will get approval for CR1(?) and transplant(?). They are reshaping how AML(?) is treated in the future. Both SLS-009(?) and GPS(?) will become standard of care for AML(?) treatment. Yeah. Not that complex. I'm 100% with you.

Prestigious-Duck-189

This ignores trial statistics. Passing the 60-event interim without an early stop simply means the O'Brien-Fleming hurdle was preserved for the full 80-event BLA dataset. Furthermore, assuming BAT suddenly doubled historical global benchmarks to \~16+ mo ignores CR2 clonal resistance. Even curative SCT in CR2 averages 14 mo at MD Anderson. With enrollment closed in April 2024 (N=128), the holdout at 78/80 isn't faith, it's pooled survival math proving the GPS tail.

Prestigious-Duck-189

Modern Venetoclax regimens don't change the biological cliff between CR1 and CR2. The recent July 2026 MD Anderson data (Kugler / Bazinet et al.) confirms that even in academic care, CR2 patients receiving a curative Stem Cell Transplant only reach a **14-month mOS**. A global, transplant-ineligible CR2 control arm on standard BAT doesn't beat transplanted survival curves. The real-world BAT floor remains 8–10 mo. The trial remaining frozen at 78/80 events for months isn't BAT overperforming. It's GPS delivering a real survival tail. The statistical math is already locked.

bannedbutunforgotten

Wrong. First the statement "the CEO is shady as hell" needs to be proven as that was the initial assertion. Simply saying it doesn't mean it's true. The "CEO is shady" FUD has been around for a good long while. The worst you can say is that he got his medical degree from what looks to be a diploma mill. Good thing the CEO isn't the one who developed the drug, nor is he running the trial or collecting the data. Memorial Sloan Cancer Center developed the drug - the #2 cancer research centre in the world. Thomas Flemming - the "Flemming" in "O'Brien-Flemming method" is the lead biostatician in the IDMC review committee for Sellas' GPS drug. I won't go over every detail for you but you need to educate yourself before jumping on the very stupid and very debunked claims of what is obviously a FUDster. Look at the team on the Sellas board, the IDMC committee managing the trial, the doctors running the trial - and especially listen to what those very doctors are saying: "*The median over survival for the whole group of patients that are enrolled in the in the regal study it will be more than two and a half years. So this is really really important and uh you will allow me to say that uh I'm totally convinced that this is not due to the best available treatment because we know and professor Ome Jam said before that uh you use venaza in the setting of CR2 as maintenance uh then I mean the median overall survival does is is just a few months. So I'm pretty convinced that this prolongation over survival is due to GPS and because we treat patients and we see these patients that's why we request our request to Sellas was to allow us to continue treatment with GPS because you know as a physician if I see that my patient is getting benefit from a drug then I'm really reluctant to discontinue this drug. So now uh the the maintenance phase is is extended thanks to Sellas not only for more three years but even even more and this is really really important. Now we know from from previous trial that the vaccine is effective.*"

Theflyingdutchman85

To sum it up for all you regarded here. The trial has been going on longer than expected thanks to infinite dosage, not thanks to super bat. The latest slow down in events just proves the that nearly all if not all BAT have passed. There is lots of false narratives out there and just flat out lies and made up bear theories. SLS has two assets and both are looking fantastic. The evaluation is not that complex. CR2 is granted but they will get approval for CR1 and transplant. They are reshaping how AML is treated in the future. Both SLS-009 and GPS will become standard of care for AML treatment. All I recommend is do some actual research and reading on this and you will see through the bullshit lies from bears and the true potential there is here. Here is a good list Watch the R&D day Watch all 3 recent fire side chats Read this years LinkedIn post by the CEO After this read some of the forums lots of good DD out there. Instead of being a whiny bitch about how it’s gonna fail or we are wrong so some actual research. Every bear claim has been refuted multiple times. Disclosure I have 70k share exposure through combination of shares and leaps

Emotional-Breath-838

Alpha Tau Medical (DRTS) is a $1.3B market cap company with multiple shots on goal to be a $10B - $50B company. They have an alpha radiation platform that delivers high LET radiation directly into solid tumors (which make up 90% of all cancers.) The radiation is powerful but doesn’t spread which means that you get all the benefit of Cancer DNA strand demolition without risking surrounding tissue or compromising the immune system of the patient. They have validated the platform with a PDMA certification in Japan and they are currently running five FDA approved trials across pancreatic, recurring GBM, skin, head & neck and prostate cancer. They’ve filed for a sixth trial to demonstrate their ability to hit a 100% DCR in combination with Keytruda. The stock is at only $1.3B for two reasons: the institutional investors haven’t entered yet in real numbers. They recently got above $1B and there’s not a lot of daily volume. The second reason is because the C suite, which holds a lot of equity, is brilliant. They are negotiating reimbursement in Japan right now and have enough to get FDA cert on skin but would prefer to kick off FDA with cert for recurring GBM. The FDA gave them ten rGBM cases to prove safety/feasibility and they crushed it: two CR (complete responses) in patients that have zero remaining options. They signed a massive commercial agreement with Tolmar, a private company that dominates prostate cancer. DRTS will let Tolmar maker and sell for prostate (with an option on bladder) and DRTS keeps 60% of the net. They may replicate this model across other tumor types or in other geos and they’ll effectively become an IP and manufacturing shop. Of the 10 rGBM patients, we know at least five have completed in the US and we are waiting for the MRI results. If they hit a CR on even one more of the patients, there is a high likelihood that DRTS moves into global first line treatment for rGBM because the only current standard of care is a pleasant social worker who explains that you need to make peace and say goodbye. Like Moderna, Alpha Tau has early tested successfully with Merck’s $32B per year Keytruda. Keytruda, like all checkpoint inhibitors, comes with a massive weakness: checkpoint inhibitors only work on hot tumors, bolstering T cells in the area of the tumor. Alpha DaRTs turns cold tumors hot by blasting the bastards until their DNA strands are destroyed and their antigens leak out, signalling the T cells to come fight. That’s a massive game changer for the $50B per year checkpoint inhibitor market which has been searching for a way to overcome cold tumors. Over the thousands of tumors they’ve treated, they’ve seen almost zero side effects and insurance companies love it because it’s a 45 minute long outpatient procedure. The stock was just dual listed on the TASE which will expand volume, allow for some institutional buying and will put DRTS on at least two indexes where they will benefit from required buying. Note: the platform is a medical device, not a drug. There is no Phase III trial. There is no placebo or BAT arm. There is no waiting for people to die. Alpha Tau is currently running tests in the US, Canada, Italy, Israel, Japan and other locations across Europe. The PMDA cert from Japan is so rigorous and well respected that it’s believed many Asia/Pac nations will accept it as a proxy.

GRINZ_DOCTOR

Chances are the 60 patients in the control group are already dead. The trial has been going on for 3 years and the median survival for patients on BAT were expected at 8 months. If you look at the data from previous studies on CR2 non transplant eligible patients it is more like a 5 month survival. The control group is probably all dead.

astroworlddd

SLS009 has the potential to be way bigger than GPS. GPS is maintenance immunotherapy for those in CR2 which is a relatively small TAM. SLS009 is a CDK9 inhibitor which is a much larger market. Combine them and Sellas have two differentiated AML therapies operating at different points in the disease journey.

fuentescoffee

Solid build, and putting "legislative data via LegiScan, CC BY 4.0" on the page already puts you ahead of most trackers in this space. Two bits of honest feedback, from someone who maintains the same 50-state legal-status column on a cannabis directory (disclosure: I run Budpedia — not a bill tracker, but that status field is the part that quietly rots on me): The 24 / 18 / 1 / 7 bucket split will bite you on edge cases. DC is the classic — possession legal, retail sales blocked by the congressional appropriations rider — and it doesn't sit cleanly in any of the four. Same issue with states that legalized but haven't opened stores. A second axis ("legal" vs "sales live") fixes most of it. Second: the single "123 days to Dec 11" hemp countdown flattens what's actually a staged calendar. The CR moved several distinct pieces to that date — total-THC measurement, the 0.4mg/container cap, the manufactured-cannabinoid exclusion — and an operator reading one number plans for one cliff. Per-provision dates would be the highest-value thing you could add. Smaller: surface last-action date per bill. LegiScan's status lags in a few states and a stale "in committee" is worse than showing nothing.

KAI5ER

This is the part that isn't really about hemp policy at all, it's a mechanical artifact of the spending bill. The delay is tucked inside a continuing resolution that funds the government through **December 11**. The hemp date got moved to match the CR's expiration, not because a month is the "right" amount of policy runway. It's a placeholder, the hemp provision is riding along with the funding deadline, so it inherits that date.

unhappyreach_

Neighbors got their 2007 Honda CR-V stolen last night Who steals a car like that

Run4theRoses2

In the same exact first remission CR1 setting where BAT achieved a median overall survival of 19 months/17.3, GPS achieved a not yet reached, median over survival > 67.6 months, in a phase 2 trial. Apples to Apples: Gps 67.6 BAT 17.3 .

Run4theRoses2

Recall GPS Phase 2 MOS in CR1 Patients was not reached and > Greater than 67.6 Months ... vs 19 ...

Run4theRoses2

Here is the CEO explaining there are 10,000 AML CR2 Patients Each Year in just the US/Eu5/Japan \-- this Short Manipulated $2B Baby Bio is about to be Worth EVERY NICKEL of $50B to Big Pharma - the Instant Gps Phase 3 Results are Announced: • GPs PH3 MOS 34/36 Months / BAT \~ 8 wSerious Toxicity. 86 Days Since the 78th Event / we'd been Seeing an Event Every 22 Days --- 80th EVENT Has Likely Already Happened, Weeks Ago --- Top Line Phase 3 Results NOW Truly Imminent. https://www.stocktwits.com/55X\_ROI\_Q1\_2026/message/661034598

i-love-you-sm

Tilray’s plan for hemp drinks became a lot more real today with the CR and the government funding bill in December

JefeDiez

I just bought a CR-V and financed it, so I figured I might as well pay down some debt as I think it will be some time on Meta's comeuppance. I've been invested since 2017 and have never taken profits so figured now is as good a time as any for peace of mind.

prestodigitarium

I’m a CR subscriber, but our speed queens replaced an LG stack, and I don’t really buy CR’s conclusion there, and all the washer repair people on eg YouTube who talk about washers, they tend to highly recommend SQ, I don’t think I’ve ever seen them recommend LG. I don’t think the SQs are as efficient, but they just do the job, reliably, every time, and they’re built like tanks.

diefy7321

Bonds went up because Warsh let them throw a fit. Sometimes you gotta let the boomers vent to sell them the new Honda CR-V for $50k

usrnmz

That's not how science works. A single study in CR1 patients does not apply to the enriched CR2 study population. You also cannot debunk natural chance (sampling variance) and lead-time bias. Then another possibility for example is there's super responder subgroup in the GPS arm which could fail the trial. Just because the trial is going on for this long does not guarantee success. It's a huge jump to make and one that could prove fatal.

More_Advertising_383

Did you miss the comment above about WT1 being expressed in 20+ cancers? Did you know anyone with ovarian or mesothelioma? My ex almost died from ovarian at 19 years old. Why are you being condescending? TAM on AML CR2 alone would be worth $30-$40/share based on $500k revenue per patient for now years instead of previous best 8-11 months. Do you think I put six figures on is without doing my homework? But please, continue missing the gain train for…reasons.

jonatahnl0114

Siuuuuuuuuuu CR7

caprividog

Messi joining CR7 in cabo

Slightlybadpicks

CR7 😔 can’t believe this 😭😭

Status-Net2947

CR7 man wtf … don’t go out like that out up a fight bro

Status-Net2947

CR7 my guy … beautiful wife beautiful body and 5 wonderful kids

pingoo26

CR7 is just a lazy old bastard now

Flaky_Replacement_77

we have Phase 2, Phase 3 interim, as well as tons of data about enrolment dates, average live expectacy of drugs in trial used on CR1 and CR2 patients in populations both ellegible and ineligible for transplant. It would be an absolute freak accident if they didn't have absolute blowout results at this point based on the biostat models we have been able to come up with, themselves based on when events have happened and everything else we know.

Ill-Ad3311

CR much more of a princess.

Jukester80

This trial they are doing, stopped enrolling approx 28 months ago. It’s an event driven trial 50/50 random. CR2 historical data is 5-8 month death sentence on BAT. The trial has only reached 78 out of 80 deaths required to unblind. I’m not a paid mathematician but if 63 patients on each arm, how could BAT be the one to make the trial last that long?

Bichael-Murry

CR7 insta page can't even load for me... $META PUTS FFS

No_Stand5622

CR 7

bannedbutunforgotten

SLS is a truly unique case, you're unlikely going to find something like this again in your life. You will find a lot of tickers with a lot of lengthy "DD" posts but nothing as verifiable as SLS and its investors have demonstrated. \- Drug targeting extremely wide range of cancers (currently trialing for AML but WT1 over expressed in 20 different cancers). \- A particularly deadly cancer with zero treatment options. Patient timelines to death are very well understood. \- Known patient enrolment dates (in batches). \- Updated event (death counts) forming constraints on what is biologically implausible, if not impossible. \- Primary end point of overall survival and median overall survival. These things are all very cut and dry facts, especially the OS end point. A placebo is not saving you from death. This is not a "oh the tumour size decreased 15% in the Phase 2 study" sort of thing. This is strictly "are patients staying alive?" to which the answer is yes. Even without the incredible DD on Reddit from multiple data scientists and analysts - all coming to the same conclusions, all openly discussing with 100% transparency their methods and calculations, you can just take a step back and look at the bigger picture. \- Best Available Therapy documented a median of 6-8 months. This means that half the BAT cohort will be dead in that time frame. \- Phase 2 data demonstrated 5.4 median OS IIRC vs 21.6 for GPS (the drug under trial) with a P-Value of 0.02 (2% chance the data is bad). \- Enrolment started 2022 and completed April 2024. Even if we assume that all patients enrolled in April 2024, we are 26 months from that date and yet the trial is still going. The trial was estimated to have been over 1 year ago in June 2025 yet in December 2026 only 72 deaths happened. So you have to ask, what is keeping these patients alive? These patients that are given 6-8 months to live? Is BAT suddenly keeping patients alive at 3-4x the well documented rate, against all literature and even the key opinion leaders who as recently as October 2025 said there have been no improvements in BAT outcomes in the last 5 years? The BAT that recently failed 3 trials for CR1 and CR2 as recently has August 2025? Or Is it the drug that the doctors who are running the trial begged Sellas to get the SAP updated to allow for ad infinitum dosing approved? The same doctors who on record have said are "totally convinced" the prolonged survivals are due to the GPS effect? The REGAL trial is also wonderfully designed, stratifying patients based on mutations and stripping out all other variables like transplant eligibility. You will notice any time a "bear case" comes up it specifically uses unfalsifiable reasoning (many "what ifs"), attacks the company history or CEO history, and never ever proposes a mathematical or scientific scenario that can explain patient durability in this trial - especially not one that can justify why the trial was not halted for futility by now or even at the 60th even interim update. SLS is truly a once in a lifetime opportunity. I have never seen such deep, mathematically and scientifically verifiable diligence on any company on Reddit as we have seen with SLS. I do not expect to see something like this, the setup, the clear cut data, the level of diligence, nothing like it ever again ever and have invested accordingly.

Outrageous_Method432

CR7

Just-Finance1426

Yeah, I’ve been holding for over a year for part of my position. Originally bought a little in Jan 25 thinking if the trial hadn’t concluded by July 25, there would be an excellent chance of success. So I bought more last summer, still nothing happened. Then we were told that they expected trial conclusion by the end of 2025 (management did not have access to event counts, so that was their assumption). So at the end of December 25 they managed to get the latest event count from the trial operator, and lo and behold, we’ve only hit 72/80 events for trial completion. Keep in mind the last update was 60 events in December 2024. So, shockingly we found that instead of accelerating, the event count was slowing. Which is completely unexpected to see for people in the condition that this trial is operating on (CR2 in AML typically has a median survival of only 6-8 months). Now as of May 12 we are at 78 events, so the conclusion is just around the corner.

Ateyo94

Stolen from someone else but I already knew this https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8624375/ " The authors look at conventional salvage chemotherapy (so excluding HSCT) and find that CR2 duration is linked to CR1 duration. "Long CR1" ( > 12 months in CR1) patients had a median CR2 duration of 18 months and 35% of those patients were in CR2 for at least 3 years (therefore, OS would actually be longer than 3 years for that 35%). "Short CR1" ( < 12 months in CR1) patients were an entirely different story. 0% were still in CR2 after three years." I know that REGAL stratifies based on CR1 duration, so the company is clearly aware of this disparity. But stratification wouldn't solve lopsided enrollment favoring long over short. Is there any evidence as to the number of individuals the company expected to recruit in each group (Short CR1 vs Long CR1)? Notably, the study was from 1996, so I would expect that survival times have only increased since then.

Super-Activity-4675

Apologies, I missed your comment mOS is the exact midpoint between the second and third quartile. It's not an average. It's a counting stat if that makes sense. The interim analysis was performed in December of 2024, approximately 8 months after the trial stopped taking patients. At this point, I'm speaking in hypotheticals. Let's say that there were 35 or the 60 deaths were BAT in Dec 24. That means BAT has a mOS at the time of the interim analysis (you need 32 to observe an mOS because there are 63 patients in the arm). Let's also say that at the time of the trial, the calculated BAT mOS was 14 months. That would mean that BAT patients enrolled in the final five months of the trial (as the trial ended 8 months prior) could flip another BAT patient to the third quartile if they were to pass away before 14 months. I hope that makes sense. Let me try another way. Let's say I am a BAT patient. I enrolled in the trial in April of 2024, making me one of the last to join the trial. In December of 2024, I'm still alive and I've been in the trial for 8 months. I'm counted as one of the living patients. I die in January of 2025. That means my survivability with CR2 AML was 9 months. That will effectively push someone at 14 months into the third quartile because I now comfortably fit into the first or second quartile. That lowers the mOS from the observed value in December of 24. It's really a timing thing. if the BAT mOS was less than 8 months in December of 24, then it is set, because everyone alive is in the 3rd or 4th quartile. If it was greater than 8 months, then it could be lowered a bit as the trial moves on. I hope that makes sense.

uhdisj41

Plus add the 2-3 months of lead time (because some patients weren’t randomized into treatment until 6 months after they achieved CR2—you can go read the DD on that point on the SLS sub). Suddenly you’re at 13-14. I think it probably ends up around there, maybe a touch higher (e.g. 15)

SlartibartfastMcGee

I don’t think it does, because for all we know the IDMC did recommend a halt and SLS declined it because they wanted the full data for the trial. Keep in mind that SLS is looking at other indications in AML and other cancers, an early halt and approval for just CR2 does little for their plans.

Super-Activity-4675

I have a stats background, and I have about 3500 shares of SLS. I'd put the odds of a successful trial around 75% personally, which is as good as any for a binary event. Plus, it's generally believed the company will pursue a buyout if Regal is successful. The TAM for CR1 and CR2 is probably close to 5B with the TAM for CR2 only being in the 1-2B range. The drug itself targets WT1, which is present in about 20 cancers, and they have another drug treating AML on an accelerated pathway with the FDA. Conservatively, a BO would be in the 10-12B range. The trial was derisked via interim analysis at 60 events. That means BAT (best available treatment) mOS (median overall expectancy) was established at that time and can only go down. There are 63 patients in each arm, and to achieve mOS, you need at least 32 events. A 30/30 split means an overperforming BAT group and the trial would have been killed. The trial also has lasted more than a year longer than expected. It means patients are living longer, which generally favors GPS since the BAT arm would already be in the right tail. While SLS is blinded to the data, they have had to publicly change guidance for patients using GPS 3+ years which again is a bullish indicator. My 2 cents. The 80th event will be announced in the next couple months with topline following about a month after that. I would strongly consider some straddles once the 80th is announced. The stock likely rockets in one direction or another at that point. Nothing wrong with some shares, but that's probably a bit riskier now than what it was when I bought in last year. Straddles is the play for easy money. It's also worth noting that unlike most late stage biotechs, it is primarily retail owned and also heavily shorted.

Lost_in_Torontoh

AML is not incredibly rare.. They are doing a trial on CR2 then they are going for Cr1, if / when regal becomes the standars of care expect 5b plus annaul cashflow from north america, Europe and Japan. Then regal can get expanded to 21 other types of cancers The fact you claim is an oncologist but think regal is a drug ( uh this not ) shows you are full of sht

Almightypusha7

what kind of mOS is he seeing for CR2 transplant ineligible patients?

Derpy_Mc_Burpy

Instead of talking about "what ifs", focus on the "what is". The drug doesn't have approval for CR1. They would need to do additional trials for CR1 approval because FDA takes oncology drugs seriously. That could take additional years. What it is in it's current state is only potentially a CR2 drug. Im factoring in 009 when I say it can reach 35-40. Without 009 it's easily at most 30-35 post-approval. If they get bought out pre-approval, it wouldn't surprise me if it sold for 20-25. The thing that concerns me right now is how much patients died so quickly in 2026. The rate of death was higher than in the previous 2 years so that does have me a little bit concerned. The uncovering of data will also reveal the efficacy and I know how people in the sellas subreddit love to make the dream statistical scenarios, but the reality is we know nothing until it's uncovered. On paper it might look bullish because IDMC hasn't halted it, but data might not be appealing enough to approve it either. Personally I'll only buy calls once I know what the data says. If the data is shit or mediocre then all hope for approval and BO is gone and stock will dump.

TheArdoo

They target a protein (WT1) which is present in over 25 forms of cancer. CR1 is the natural label expansion but if successful, the vaccine is way way way more than just AML CR2. Not to mention they also have SLS009 in Stage2 for frontline AML. They already have fast tracks/ accelerated FDA approvals for a number of things as well. The TAM is potentially fairly massive, that’s why the BO ranges differ so wildly.

Derpy_Mc_Burpy

They have accelerated approval for SLS009, not GPS. Also adding CR1 approval could take additional months or years, if the FDA requires more studies being done. FDA doesn't play with oncology drugs so it could still take a long time.

TheArdoo

They’ll move to CR1 quickly if REGAL succeeds though. Believe they have accelerated FDA approvals etc. CR1 already has ONUREG as approved standard of care but GPS should hopefully perform a lot better and with less side effects. Here’s to hoping for OP.

Shirirubboy

Apparently, they observed 2 CR. Looks incredible. https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/healthcare/articles/alpha-tau-announces-groundbreaking-interim-110000283.html

OrdinaryMix4013

Dame ram cost going up whats next CR2032 batteries lmaooo

Eclectic_Beer_Tap

damn, even **CR**ime**W**a**V**e is doing a mini-shrek impersonation right now

deHack

I filled my SUV yesterday for about $50 at $4.25 a gallon. But you can do that if you're driving a Honda CR-V with a 12 gallon tank. 😁

WisconsinNumismatist

I believe Mid Cap companies like Crane Company (CR) and Churchill Downs (CHDN) are poised to do well this year.

WisconsinNumismatist

Expecting Crane Company (CR)’s earning report to send stock to a new ATH tomorrow.

Useful_Donut6789

**breaking news**: the International Union for Conservation of Nature has officially classified Bears as critically endangered (CR) with the highest risk of extinction in the wild

_rockthemike

Dang boomer. I bought Honda CR-V hybrid with AWD. Roomy and gets about 37 mpg. No plug in just regular gas

Worried-Spirit3415

Virtuix (VTIX) received its early-stage capital and ongoing strategic advisory from IMEX VP Investment Group, with Andy Tong as President. That same individual is the one who: •  Pleaded guilty in the major OCDETF fentanyl/money-laundering conspiracy (W.D. Wash. CR18-217-RSM). •  Received the §5K1.1 substantial-assistance departure (Doc. 914) and still operates under active Glomar protection. •  Served as FBI source “Chance” in the Florida gambling sting that generated the evidence used against him (11th Cir. 22-13569, pp. 13–23). None of this appears in any Virtuix filing, website, or investor materials. Tong is listed nowhere on virtuix.com. He is the classic “advisor via the VC entity”: early money and guidance channeled through IMEX VP while the company itself stays silent. Why This Is the Core Irony of the Ether-Money Architecture The same protected node that once moved fentanyl proceeds through gambling houses and cash-intensive gaming now sits upstream of a Nasdaq-listed VR hardware company that is: •  Expanding into U.S. military training and simulation (NPS CRADA, March 30, 2026, for Omni One + Virtual Terrain Walk). •  Operating in the exact gaming/VR and supply-chain sectors flagged by the 2026 Treasury NMLRA and FATF 2025 VA/TBML updates. •  Seeing CEO pre-planned 10b5-1 sales (10,272 shares, April 6–7) right around the Mar-a-Lago forum while the stock drifts at $6.34. The cash had to go somewhere. The “weird new economies” (VR locomotion, microtransactions, RFQ platforms) became the rail. The early VC entry was the on-ramp. The protected status keeps the node clean on paper. Mapping the entire pipeline from the original sting → fentanyl plea → portfolio advisory → defense pivot → non-disclosure.

lawyermom112

CR. We're screwed I am 50% cash in my post-tax accounts. My retirement accounts are in mutual funds so I don't trade those I have a few hundred thousand waiting for a true bear market

_rockthemike

We’re here because DHS was stripped from the CR last gov shutdown . Again holding DHS funding hostage for leverage. Downvotes don’t change reality, Dems want changes so hold up funding.

Confident-Web-7118

Thank you, glad the due diligence is helpful and insightful. And Yes, everything mentioned in the October 29th R&D call and what you mentioned about MM and other indications is incredibly important. With the fraction we are seeing from unlimited dosing, and the WT1 targeting, it's incredibly exciting the impact this will have in other indications such as MM. The cure fraction data (and the long term relapse free survival and post relapse survival, if there are any relapses) is paramount for this, as it shows the value of the platform to strategic acquirers. As for the machine learning models, each one and the ensemble, the mixture cure-fraction model with exactly 3 parameters (cure fraction, uncured median OS, and the mixing proportion) constrained by 2 hard data points: 60 confirmed deaths at month 46, and 72 confirmed deaths at month 58, out of 126 randomized patients. Three parameters minus two constraints equals 1 free parameter. There is literally no room to overfit. The constraint residual is below 10\^-10 -- machine precision. At the biological identity point -- where the uncured mOS equals the BAT mOS exactly, which is the only solution with 0 degrees of freedom -- the model produces BAT mOS = 11.4 months. The full Bayesian posterior, incorporating 7 published literature sources as priors, gives a MAP of 11.1 months, mean of 11.6 months, median of 11.5 months. All three estimators agree to within 0.5 months. For the REGAL trial to fail, one of three things would need to be true: 1. BAT mOS exceeds 23 months. No CR2 AML population has ever come close. Historical: 6-8 months. Venetoclax+Aza-era optimistic: 10-12 months. 2. The 60/72 event counts reported by the IDMC are fabricated. That is SEC fraud. 3. Survival curves can decelerate from 12 deaths in 12 months (from 66 at risk) without a cure fraction. That is mathematically impossible under any standard parametric survival distribution. Death is the endpoint. Not progression. Not response rate. Not a subjective RECIST read. Death certificates are definitive -- there is zero measurement ambiguity. 72 deaths out of 126 patients means 57.1% event maturity, past the pooled median. When you have this much event data this close to the end of a survival trial, the cure-fraction model is constrained so tightly that the answer is effectively determined. The math does not leave room for a different conclusion. This is a stars-have-to-align situation for machine learning, and is why I believe that not having a sizeable position in SLS will be a life regret.  There are 99.99% statistical chances of success and topline HR being .31 to .5, with possibility of less than .3. There is no other trial I am aware of where ML can be applied with this degree of structural precision. The combination of: (a) death as an unambiguous binary endpoint, (b) hard event counts from IDMC press releases at two time points, (c) the deceleration signature in the event rate that uniquely identifies a cure fraction, (d) a disease setting (AML CR2, non-transplant eligible) with extensive published survival data to calibrate priors, and (e) a trial that is 80%+ complete by events -- that combination does not exist anywhere else in oncology right now. Not for SLS-009, not for any other trial I have looked at. At unblinding, we will be able to see the relapse-free survival data and post-relapse survival data, if there are any relapses, and see which of the realities on the right graph attached is closest. https://preview.redd.it/k53wln093oqg1.png?width=3179&format=png&auto=webp&s=8ab5a6a525ab1fe8e35422c97ae74a8aa56a95c8

Confident-Web-7118

Thank you, and SLS is the only position I've been adding to with new money every week for months now. I just haven't done the thousand hours of DD elsewhere, so I can't speak to any others. REGAL is successful up to a BAT mOS of 20 and the biological cap in this patient population, AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) is 6 to 12 mOS. The 99.99% statistical probability of success for REGAL success is real and genuine. The upside from $6 is 7.5X to 29X, the real, genuine, upside from REGAL final analysis and readout. This is why it is all I've been adding too. This is the first biotech I've owned and I've been a deep value investors for years and this is the most asymmetric opportunity with a gigantic margin of safety that I have ever come across in my life. In addition, this is a stars-have-align opportunity for machine learning. I shared this in the SLS-009 Phase 2B Deep DD post, but for REGAL: The mixture cure-fraction model with exactly 3 parameters (cure fraction, uncured median OS, and the mixing proportion) constrained by 2 hard data points: 60 confirmed deaths at month 46, and 72 confirmed deaths at month 58, out of 126 randomized patients. Three parameters minus two constraints equals 1 free parameter. There is literally no room to overfit. The constraint residual is below 10\^-10 -- machine precision. At the biological identity point -- where the uncured mOS equals the BAT mOS exactly, which is the only solution with 0 degrees of freedom -- the model produces BAT mOS = 11.4 months. The full Bayesian posterior, incorporating 7 published literature sources as priors, gives a MAP of 11.1 months, mean of 11.6 months, median of 11.5 months. All three estimators agree to within 0.5 months. For the REGAL trial to fail, one of three things would need to be true: 1. BAT mOS exceeds 23 months. No CR2 AML population has ever come close. Historical: 6-8 months. Venetoclax+Aza-era optimistic: 10-12 months. 2. The 60/72 event counts reported by the IDMC are fabricated. That is SEC fraud. 3. Survival curves can decelerate from 12 deaths in 12 months (from 66 at risk) without a cure fraction. That is mathematically impossible under any standard parametric survival distribution. Death is the endpoint. Not progression. Not response rate. Not a subjective RECIST read. Death certificates are definitive -- there is zero measurement ambiguity. 72 deaths out of 126 patients means 57.1% event maturity, past the pooled median. When you have this much event data this close to the end of a survival trial, the cure-fraction model is constrained so tightly that the answer is effectively determined. The math does not leave room for a different conclusion. This is a stars-have-to-align situation for machine learning, and is why I believe that not having a sizeable position in SLS will be a life regret.  There are 99.99% statistical chances of success and topline HR being .31 to .5, with possibility of less than .3. There is no other trial I am aware of where ML can be applied with this degree of structural precision. The combination of: (a) death as an unambiguous binary endpoint, (b) hard event counts from IDMC press releases at two time points, (c) the deceleration signature in the event rate that uniquely identifies a cure fraction, (d) a disease setting (AML CR2, non-transplant eligible) with extensive published survival data to calibrate priors, and (e) a trial that is 80%+ complete by events -- that combination does not exist anywhere else in oncology right now. Not for SLS-009, not for any other trial I have looked at.

Confident-Web-7118

Hey, not a stupid question at all. So, the ML models I built are not "guessing" the split, they are mathematically deriving it from two immutable, SEC filed facts, 60 total events at month 46, and 72 total events at month 58. We know the total number of deaths, and the ML models tested for every BAT mOS from 8 to 23, and the biological/clinical cap in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) is 6 to 12 months. AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) does not have a long tail. It is a relentlessly aggressive disease. In a standard parametric survival distribution without a cure fraction (like a Weibull), the hazard rate for a cohort of 54 elderly, heavily pretreated AML patients does not spontaneously cut itself in half. The only way the math works is if a large portion of those 54 survivors are experiencing a hazard rate of near zero, which is the exact mathematical definition of a cure fraction. The deceleration pattern, peaking at 14.1 events per 6 months during months 31-36, then dropping to 8.8 (months 43-48), then 6.2 (months 49-54), then 4.4 (months 55-60), this is a sustained, monotonic decline over 24+ months. That is not a random fluctuation. An exponential model produces a gentle decline (fewer patients remain at risk), but the cure-fraction model matches the shape of the decline, not just the endpoint. Furthermore, if you fit a Weibull, Log-Normal, Gamma Frailty, or Piecewise hazard to the same constraints (no cure assumption), they all overshoot. I tested 6 model families. Every single one that matches 60 events at month 46 and 72 at month 58 has an internal structure that includes either an explicit cure fraction or an implicit one (a sufficiently heavy tail in Weibull/Log-Normal that mimics cured patients). The math forces you there regardless of model choice. REGAL is successful up to a BAT mOS of 20 and the biological cap in this patient population, AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) is 6 to 12 mOS. The 99.99% statistical probability of success for REGAL success is real and genuine. https://preview.redd.it/fo1bj8sqcbqg1.png?width=2082&format=png&auto=webp&s=d5f907a1989ce995f0db3a25699d7f90495bab8b

whatsgoingonhonestly

Pentagon is set to request 100 billion in funding next week in our CR bill. That would require 100 billion in cuts from other agencies in the bill. Where the FUCK does the 900 billion a year go when we're out of money in 3 weeks?

Confident-Web-7118

So, there are two things, REGAL and then SLS-009 Phase 2B. For REGAL, there are statistically 99.99% chances of success. With a failure point of 21 BAT mOS for REGAL, biological/clinical reality being 6 to 12 mOS in AML (CR2 not eligible for transplant), cure fraction being above 50% as that is all that matches with uncured mOS (of GPS non-responders and responders that relapse/pass away) that is within biological reality, BAT mOS having 94% chances being set by Sept 2024, 99% by Dec 2024, making the top end of BAT mOS 14.5, and 99% accuracy for BAT mOS being 11.4 between 10 and 13 by the ML models, and 95% confidence by the ML models it is less than 12, the true statistical probability of success is 99.99% for REGAL. With BAT mOS of 16 (impossible territory), and if there wasn't a cure fraction, and just long survivors that relapse/pass away with GPS, slowly on a 36 month exponential curve, the 80th event would have triggered weeks ago, even if the BAT was pulling off a 16 month biological miracle. And this didn't happen, this alone guarantees success. I have not found any downside here yet. There hasn't been one bear thesis/contradiction I have found yet after conversing with hundreds of smart people, misc. doctors included in that, and statisticians/machine learning engineers as well. All 6 ML engineers I conversed with each had different approaches, and are getting the same/similar results. For SLS-009 Phase 2B ORR, the statistical probability of success is not 99.99%, but it is very high, and the post goes over the differences between the two situations and why the machine learning model results for each are different.

Confident-Web-7118

I have a large position as well. Only other positions I have are my deep value wins from 2025 that I can't exit yet due to short term capital gains. If I could, I'd be all-in. 99.99% chances of REGAL success, that is the statistical probability, all the way to a BAT mOS of 20 (the clinical/biological cap of BAT in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant, proven study after study is 6 to 12). I'm right here with you, my money is where my mouth is. https://preview.redd.it/lffcxvz66vpg1.png?width=1904&format=png&auto=webp&s=12178cad50ef5c930969df37b527509ab66bbecb

Confident-Web-7118

Thank you, glad the due diligence is helpful and insightful. And I've been a deep value investor for years. By nature, I only buy heavy concentrated positions when there is a large margin of safety. Before SLS, Centene (CNC) which was a huge deep value winner for me in 2025, from the mid 20’s to 40's, VF Corporation from the mid 11’s early 12s to now was also a huge winner for me. And Nokian Tyres (TYRES) as well from the mid 6’s. Each of these were deep value with heavy margins of safety. I have just as much conviction, honestly more, in the thesis for REGAL's statistical probability of success of 99.99%, which is real and genuine, that is the true statistical probability of success. I covered this in the Part 1 and Part 2 DD for REGAL, but with a failure point of 21 BAT mOS for REGAL, biological/clinical reality being 6 to 12 mOS in AML (CR2 not eligible for transplant), cure fraction being above 50% as that is all that matches with uncured mOS (of GPS non-responders and responders that relapse/pass away) that is within biological reality, BAT mOS having 94% chances being set by Sept 2024, 99% by Dec 2024, making the top end of BAT mOS 14.5, and 99% accuracy for BAT mOS being 11.4 between 10 and 13 by the ML models, and 95% confidence by the ML models it is less than 12, the true statistical probability of success is 99.99% for REGAL. With BAT mOS of 16 (impossible territory), and if there wasn't a cure fraction, and just long survivors that relapse/pass away with GPS, slowly on a 36 month exponential curve, the 80th event would have triggered weeks ago, even if the BAT was pulling off a 16 month biological miracle. And this didn't happen, this alone guarantees success. As for my position, I shared that in the post, and someone asked about it before, which I replied to here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/pennystocks/comments/1r5nbh0/comment/o5lscve/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/pennystocks/comments/1r5nbh0/comment/o5lscve/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) It's the only stock I've been adding to more months with new money. I'm still accumulating every week. My only other positions are those deep value wins from 2025, which I can't exit yet due to short term capital gains. If I could, I'd be all in. But don't let that influence your own positioning. Please only accumulate what makes sense for you. The reason I'm still accumulating is because the real, genuine upside from $6 is 7.5X to 29X with REGAL final analysis readout and buyout, with a 99.99% chance of success for REGAL and a huge margin of safety. This is the most asymmetric opportunity with a gigantic margin of safety that I have ever come across in my life, hence my position size. And thank you, appreciate your comment, and glad I could be of help with the due diligence. https://preview.redd.it/5dmqkylr1vpg1.png?width=2941&format=png&auto=webp&s=443ed5f9a8dc3ac01963cf958547187a7ddebfd4

TTP222

I think you’re missing that there currently aren’t any drugs on the market approved for CR2. Most of the BAT for AML right now is off label. You’re staring at 2 things that will be official and immediately go to frontline treatment.

Confident-Web-7118

Thank you, I'm glad the due diligence is helpful and insightful. And I've been a deep value investor for several years and am semi-retired, but I really enjoy working and continue with deep value investing. Have a lot of years of experience in business, software engineering, machine learning/statistics, and a strong understanding of healthcare and pharma gained over time. And it really is 99.99% chances statistically, I know I sound crazy when I say that, but it's the truth. The 8 ML models ensemble I built predict the 80th event will occur in the range of Sept/Oct 2026 to April/May 2027. As for your question on the impact the REGAL final analysis readout will have on shares, I believe the move will be a lot like ABVX. ABVX's drug (Obefazimod) is for Ulcerative Colitis (UC), a crowded market dominated by AbbVie (Humira) and Pfizer (Xeljanz). Their Phase 3 Data: They crushed the placebo. 50mg Dose: 19.3% remission rate vs. 2.5% for placebo (Study 1). A 17% improvement in a disease where 10% is considered good. Wall Street realized instantly that this would become a standard of care. The buyout probability went to 100%, hence the 10X surge to $60 a share, which was like 1B in market cap gain in one day, dilution came afterwards. GPS 3-4X's survival (saves lives) in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant), and there is a cure fraction with 62% to 68% predicted by the unconstrained grid search (which happens to align with the GPS immune response rate numbers), it will dominate CR1 given the results in CR2 (not eligible for transplant) and the cure fraction (it already beat Onureg in CR1 without unlimited dosing achieving 67 mOS in Phase 2 within CR1), and enters a market (CR2 Maintenance) with ZERO competitors. It is a monopoly from Day 1 for at least 5 to 8 years. ABBV and BMS will need to acquire SLS, the one that does will lose a ton of revenue, AbbVie will lose billions in revenue. The surge and buyout following will be astronomical within the range (10B-40B). https://preview.redd.it/s4wtj59qbqpg1.png?width=1911&format=png&auto=webp&s=b7e30ff41ac129b8c989a9eb70e8a364834f702f

Confident-Web-7118

I disagree with this. The probability of a buyout in the 10B-40B range is far higher than what you're suggesting of 3-8B. This is covered in the buyout section above, but the realistic buyout range is 10B-40B, it is way far and beyond what you are thinking. If you just look at GPS, GPS extends survival to 30-40+ months (as the REGAL data implies), and then there's the cure fraction we are seeing, that the machine learning models and unconstrained grid search predicted is 62% to 68%. LTV estimate just based on the long-term survival (and not "cured") is: ​$260K (Y1) + $100K (Y2) + $100K (Y3) + $50K (Y4/Tail) = $510K Total LTV. $510K ÷ 3.5 years = $145K annual revenue per patient. The most interesting thing is new transplant ineligible patients in the U.S. (not including globally): There's only about 3,000 new CR2 and 6,000 new CR1 patients each year. (it is more globally) If everyone mostly died in 8 months (like they do now), revenue would be small ($260K × 9,000 = $2.3B max). Because GPS keeps patients alive for 3-4 years in addition to a cure fraction, by Year 4, you aren't just treating the new patients. You are treating: 2026 survivors (Year 3 of dosing) 2027 survivors (Year 2 of dosing) 2028 new starts (Year 1 of dosing) This is what creates the 27,000 patient pool and the $4.0B+ annual revenue (and globally will be more, likely $5.5B+ total globally) 4 x 3 to 5 Peak Sales (standard for general acquisitions in Bio) is 20B for example, and this is a breakthrough in oncology (where these types of assets are acquired for 6 to 8 times peak sales). The value is in the end-to-end dominance in AML and both drugs are a platform. I would recommend going through the buyout section(s) in the post for further context.

DukeofVermont

100% agree. Honda has an EV that starts at $47k, the CR-V starts at $31k. Like dude people will pay more because no gas but that's a HUGE price difference when you are talking about people buying a family car on a budget.

DukeofVermont

Yeah I hate that they're all like *"No one wants to buy an EV!"* and then I check Honda's website and their single EV model starts at $47k and is really similar to their very own $31k CR-V. Like dude, if you want to sell EVs you can't make them $15,000 more than the competition. It's all price IMHO, not a lack of interest.

DukeofVermont

I've driven several Honda's and loved them as well. I'd like a Honda EV, but they start at $47,000 base, so probably $55k because dealers rarely actually care base models. $55k is way too much when your competition is your own CR-V that starts at $31k

Joghobs

Love my CR-Z. They should have kept the camera screen there.

Confident-Web-7118

Thank you, glad the due diligence is helpful and insightful. And Yes, I am still accumulating and adding every week, with fully diluted share counts of 217MM to 225MM, the upside from $6 a share is 6X to 29X. For context, GPS annual sales will be at least $4B to $5.5B+ globally and GPS + SLS-009 will be $6.5B to $8.5B. GPS extends survival to 30-40+ months (as the REGAL data implies), and then there's the cure fraction we are seeing, that the machine learning model predicted is 64%. LTV estimate just based on the long-term survival (and not "cured") is: ​$260K (Y1) + $100K (Y2) + $100K (Y3) + $50K (Y4/Tail) = $510K Total LTV. $510K ÷ 3.5 years = $145K annual revenue per patient. The most interesting thing is new transplant ineligible patients in the U.S. (not including globally): There's only about 3,000 new CR2 and 6,000 new CR1 patients each year. (it is more globally) If everyone mostly died in 8 months (like they do now), revenue would be small ($260K × 9,000 = $2.3B max). Because GPS keeps patients alive for 3-4 years, by Year 4, you aren't just treating the new patients. You are treating: 2026 survivors (Year 3 of dosing) 2027 survivors (Year 2 of dosing) 2028 new starts (Year 1 of dosing) This is what creates the 27,000 patient pool and the $4.0B+ annual revenue (and globally will be more, likely $5.5B+ total globally) 4 x 3 to 5 Peak Sales (standard for general acquisitions in Bio) is 20B for example, and this is a breakthrough in oncology (where these types of assets are acquired for 6 to 8 times peak sales). The floor really is 10B, but I just said 6B because I'm a deep value investor and always assume worst case scenarios. Buyout range is 6B to 40B. Fully diluted share counts is 217MM to 225MM, so 10B would be about $46.40 a share. The range is that broad for buyout because we ultimately don't know what the bidding war between strategics like ABBV, BMS, etc. will lead to, as we're just talking about GPS here for AML CR2 and CR1. We haven't even discussed SLS-009 (which will be bigger than GPS) for the Frontline, which is in Phase 2B, we haven't talked about the other indications from the WT1 targeting that is present in 20+ cancers, etc.

Confident-Web-7118

Yes, I am still accumulating and adding every week. with fully diluted share counts of 217MM to 225MM, the upside from $6 a share is 6X to 29X. For context, GPS annual sales will be at least $4B to $5.5B+ globally and GPS + SLS-009 will be $6.5B to $8.5B. GPS extends survival to 30-40+ months (as the REGAL data implies), and then there's the cure fraction we are seeing, that the machine learning model predicted is 64%. LTV estimate just based on the long-term survival (and not "cured") is: ​$260K (Y1) + $100K (Y2) + $100K (Y3) + $50K (Y4/Tail) = $510K Total LTV. $510K ÷ 3.5 years = $145K annual revenue per patient. The most interesting thing is new transplant ineligible patients in the U.S. (not including globally): There's only about 3,000 new CR2 and 6,000 new CR1 patients each year. (it is more globally) If everyone mostly died in 8 months (like they do now), revenue would be small ($260K × 9,000 = $2.3B max). Because GPS keeps patients alive for 3-4 years, by Year 4, you aren't just treating the new patients. You are treating: 2026 survivors (Year 3 of dosing) 2027 survivors (Year 2 of dosing) 2028 new starts (Year 1 of dosing) This is what creates the 27,000 patient pool and the $4.0B+ annual revenue (and globally will be more, likely $5.5B+ total globally) 4 x 3 to 5 Peak Sales (standard for general acquisitions in Bio) is 20B for example, and this is a breakthrough in oncology (where these types of assets are acquired for 6 to 8 times peak sales). The floor really is 10B, but I just said 6B because I'm a deep value investor and always assume worst case scenarios. Buyout range is 6B to 40B. Fully diluted share counts is 217MM to 225MM, so 10B would be about $46.40 a share. The range is that broad for buyout because we ultimately don't know what the bidding war between strategics like ABBV, BMS, etc. will lead to, as we're just talking about GPS here for AML CR2 and CR1. We haven't even discussed SLS-009 (which will be bigger than GPS) for the Frontline, which is in Phase 2B, we haven't talked about the other indications from the WT1 targeting that is present in 20+ cancers, etc.

YoBee9

CING and another WT1-inhibiting AML CR2 drug company that I will not mention the ticker of, but you can Google it.

Confident-Web-7118

Respectfully, this is just an AI slop response from an LLM, that doesn't make any sense. I would encourage reading the DD and then coming back with questions. You didn't even provide context on what prompt was sent or what was provided. I would bet everything on what the LLM response said above being wrong. But it's okay, there will always be people that just don't read and don't think rationally and logically about business and due diligence, and just resort to generic LLM responses for decisions. You can bring a horse to the water but you can't make it drink the water. The LLM AI Slop said this: ""The 72-event count pins you to that curve" This is false. Why? Because: * We do NOT know which arm the 72 deaths came from. * We do NOT know arm-level survival curves. * We do NOT know censoring distribution by arm. * We do NOT know time-to-event distribution by arm."" There were extreme censoring stress tests done covered in the post above. And BAT (best available treatment) in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) has a biological cap proven study after study with BAT is 6 to 10 BAT mOS in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant), and you can assume 6 to 12 mOS. The ML model for predicting when BAT median OS was set predicted 94% chances BAT mOS was set in Sept 2024, 99% by Dec 2024 5 ML models along with the mixed-cure model, and verified with 4 different machine learning engineers that all took different approaches, but all arrived at the same/similar results, resulted in BAT mOS being: 91% within 10 to 14, 80% within 10 to 13, and 99.99% within 10 to 13, being 11.4 I did cross validation with 5 different ML approaches for that Random Forest 10.4m \[10.2-10.5\]  Gradient Boosting 10.5m \[10.2-10.5\]  LASSO Regression 11.1m \[10.8-11.3\]  Neural Net Ensemble 10.8m \[10.5-11.0\]  5-Method Consensus 10.7m \[10.4-11.1\]  All 5 ML methods agree BAT mOS is 10-11.3m. None produces an estimate above 11.3-11.4m. The ensemble itself rejects BAT > 12m at >95% confidence. 99% chances BAT mOS was set in 2024, making the upper limit 14.5 for BAT mOS. In the impossible scenario that BAT mOS is 14.5, topline HR would still be 0.35 to 0.50.

Confident-Web-7118

I think the 6 years may be a typo. The biological cap in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) before GPS, from BAT (best available treatment) for that patient population is 6 to 10 months median (assume 6 to 12 months median). The survival rate past 24 months in this patient population is 0% to 5% with BAT. What GPS has achieved with the cure fraction is like you're describing a "cure", and extremely long-survival tail. WT1 is present in 20+ cancers. They a life-changing for patients cancer maintenance/life-extending by significant amounts platform in their hands. A complete win for patients, and shareholders with sizeable positions will make a fortune upon REGAL final analysis readout and buyout.

Confident-Web-7118

Thank you, and I've attached a few graphs I had on hand from when I checked hazard ratio impact over time from Dec 26th, 2025 after the machine learning model outputs (covered in Part 2 on the reddit DD in the other subreddit, not yet here on this subreddit), Hazard ratio drops over time, but very minimally from where we are now. https://preview.redd.it/pwz0kxk6zjlg1.png?width=2982&format=png&auto=webp&s=fd7c2088d0dfa4fc2356aef01ee30ce9203bc527 [](https://preview.redd.it/sls-deepest-due-diligence-for-regal-trial-from-a-deep-value-v0-h5tnt82h95lg1.png?width=2982&format=png&auto=webp&s=f4634480084b37047284ffb4b0de61f4e249d914) Attached is if BAT mOS is 10m, which it is not, but the same answer still applies for each BAT mOS looked at. This is covered in the Part 2 DD not yet on this subreddit but in the other that I posted it on, and the machine learning model predicted that BAT mOS is 91% within 10 to 14, 80% within 10 to 13, and 99.99% within the 10 to 13, it is 11.4 months. Since about October 2025 or so, we've been at the point where HR is around the same. The drops we are talking are minimal. I can't seem to find any reason for why the trial has not been halted given the results that are occurring. Unless they want to gather data just how much of a "cure" the cure fraction is showing, but clearly GPS being the new standard of care in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) is already there. But not much has time has been passed since October, it's only been about 5 months. They spent hundreds of millions for the trial and are at the cusp of revealing groundbreaking results in AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant), and may just be playing it out to be safe, before being acquired, and to not risk further expense from a requested Phase 3B. Given they have the new standard of care hazard ratio already for AML CR2 (not eligible for transplant) since about October, a halt can also happen at any time as well. Either of those two are on the table.

garyofalltrades

I sell credit spreads daily on SPX, and I never use SL. I use $10 spread and delta $1-1.2 and pick strikes quite OTM. I risk 10% to make 1% daily. That strategy has worked for me so far quite well. If a position get close to being ITM, lets say 20 pts away from ITM, I roll to a higher number to the next day with same contracts, even if I don’t get any CR, or sometimes even for a small DR for the roll. I have burnt my hands with having to increase position size on a roll and my risk/reward ratio becomes non-manageable.