PD

the_bagel_warmonger

They might be in a Trustee-Directed (rather than Participant-Directed) Defined Contribution plan. They are rarer than PD plans, but they do exist. In a TD plan, the plan selects the investments, you just choose how much to contribute.

the_bagel_warmonger

They might be in a Trustee-Directed (rather than Participant-Directed) Defined Contribution plan. They are rarer than PD plans, but they do exist. In a TD plan, the plan selects the investments, you just choose how much to contribute. The rules you posted are for PD plans.

the_bagel_warmonger

They might be in a Trustee-Directed (rather than Participant-Directed) Defined Contribution plan. They are rarer than PD plans, but they do exist. In a TD plan, the plan selects the investments, you just choose how much to contribute. The rules you posted are for PD plans.

Busy_Radio6183

**Jupiter, FL, May 27, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --** Jupiter Neurosciences, Inc. (NASDAQ: [**JUNS**](https://www.stocktitan.net/overview/JUNS/)), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company developing investigational therapies for neurodegenerative diseases, today announced that patient enrollment is now underway in its Phase 2a RESET clinical trial (NCT07592767) for JOTROL™ (investigational trans-resveratrol micellar formulation) in Parkinson’s Disease (PD), with first patient dosing expected in the near term. Hopefully some positive for JUNS holders

collegefootballfan69

I was speaking to my buddy this morning and he told me that he was going long ZS and short AMD, i am going to have local PD conduct a wellness check.

MediumSinger8088

Well, at least it didn't sell off 25-50% instantly on the good news. Objectively: Phase 2+3, 16 people, 150 days, delta relative to historical norms is -2.3; minimal clinically important difference is about 4. So for global PD without biomarker stratification you're looking at 2-3 years of runtime and/or a much larger sample of patients to see statistical significance. THAT SAID, the high / low GluSph is internally controlled for placebo effect and that value is well over 4 - so definitely in the "Stand up and take a look at this" level for people who know what they are dealing with in the PD area. IMO this is critical and shouldn't be ignored. Even if Gain only targets this subset of PD patients it's 5% of the total. Maybe as much as 10%.

Samjabr

Friend, I said, "China adds to the supply of **cheaper** consumer memory" [https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/1povjfp/nvidia\_to\_cut\_gaming\_gpu\_production\_by\_3040/](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/1povjfp/nvidia_to_cut_gaming_gpu_production_by_3040/) Something similar happened with NVDA gaming cards when AI took off. Nvidia has shifted production away from gaming to AI as much as possible without completely alienating the gaming community that they built their business on. The reason is obvious - higher profit margins. It's why the gaming card prices are so retarded. A lot of these production lines are fungible and lots of companies have existing commitments through contracts. If someone else can fulfill that demand, then it allows the more advanced processes to be used on higher end chips. [https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260519PD228/samsung-memory-chips-demand-2028.html](https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260519PD228/samsung-memory-chips-demand-2028.html) I'm not claiming this is happening now. Just linking a story. But even a former head of Samsung is pointing out the obvious - If all the memory makers are expanding capacity, building new FABS (TSMC, Samsung, etc.), eventually supply & demand will come closer into equilibrium, and prices will fall. This is the nature of the cyclicality of memory/disk makers. It has always been this way. The Chinese firm CXMT saw revenue go up 700% - That had to come out of someone else's revenue stream/orders. It's not magic. Just math.

Away_Cancel_5208

Additional lung cancer–focused BioNTech abstracts referenced in 2026 conference coverage include: * “First-Line Pumitamig (PD-L1 × VEGF-A bsAb) Monotherapy in PD-L1+ Non-Squamous and Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Data from a Phase 1b/2a Trial in China.” * “Progression-Free Survival and Overall Survival with Pumitamig (PD-L1 × VEGF-A bsAb) Plus Chemotherapy in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Following Progression with EGFR TKI in China: Phase 2 Study Results.”

Valkorion335786

*Out of Touch* is playing but the Miami PD are closing in on your motel hideout

PomegranateSea7066

The PD-Files

Aggravating-Taro-588

PD file is trumps nickname

iShitBloodandCumShit

Go to your local PD when you retire from being a snitch/UC.

BEAR_STEARNS_CEO

I love the airplane mission in PD

No_Stretch_7197

Holding long term. This one is is a multibagger. The 100% long-term survival + complete tumor clearance with PD-1 combo in syngeneic ovarian models is eye-catchine. The BEST part is the strong MD Anderson tie-in. The work is led by Dr. Michael Andreeff (Professor at MD Anderson), who has been involved in the development and preclinical studies of ERNA-101. They’re planning a clinical proof-of-concept trial in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in collaboration with MD Anderson. That’s a legit research partner, very hard to get accepted . Just bought some

No_Stretch_7197

Solid catalyst on a micro-float name. The 100% long-term survival + complete tumor clearance with PD-1 combo in syngeneic ovarian models is eye-catching, especially for a cold tumor like ovarian cancer where immunotherapy often struggles. What stands out even more is the strong MD Anderson tie-in. The work is led by Dr. Michael Andreeff (Professor at MD Anderson), who has been involved in the development and preclinical studies of ERNA-101. They’re planning a clinical proof-of-concept trial in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in collaboration with MD Anderson. That’s a legit research partner, not some random academic group. Just bought some

DollarThrill

Now you can finally play the game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg2PD-dwsIw

Plane-Try-6522

It isn't just the biotech sector. For the past 10, almost 20 years, most corporation have trend towards downsizing or completely eliminated their R&D department in a bid to focus on the operational and business verticals. Most corporation aren't willing to underwrite R&D risk anymore. This has led to the rise and flourishing of startups that, if successful, are acquired, to be integrated into the core business of the buying company. I had a good part of my feet on the venture capital side and quant side of my professional career. **Iova is worth looking into.** They have two lines of product: Amtagvi (FDA approved for advanced melenoma with best in - class ORR, with consistency shown years after FDA approved) and Proleukin. >**52% Amtagvi Response Rate with Two or Fewer Prior Lines of Therapy 73% Overall Disease Control Rate** >SAN CARLOS, Calif., Feb. 05, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: IOVA), a commercial biotechnology company focused on innovating, developing, and delivering novel polyclonal tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapies for patients with cancer, today announced data demonstrating a best-in-class profile for commercial Amtagvi^(®) (lifileucel) with unprecedented response rates in a real-world clinical, retrospective study in patients with advanced (unresectable or metastatic) melanoma. Amtagvi is the first one-time T cell therapy for a solid tumor cancer as well as the only FDA-approved treatment for advanced melanoma patients previously treated with anti-PD-1 and targeted therapy, where applicable. >The real-world results were highlighted in an [oral presentation](https://www.iovance.com/scientific-publications-presentations/) at the 2026 Tandem Meetings of the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT^(®)) and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR^(®)) in Salt Lake City, UT. >Forty-one evaluable patients with previously treated advanced melanoma received commercial Amtagvi according to the U.S. prescribing information at four authorized treatment centers. The physician-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 44% (18/41) and the disease control rate was 73% (30/41). Response rates were higher with earlier Amtagvi treatment. The ORR was 52% (12/23) following two or fewer lines of therapy compared to an ORR of 33% (6/18) after three or more lines of therapy. The unprecedented real-world response rates also improved upon the 31% ORR in the C-144-01 clinical trial that supported the U.S. FDA accelerated approval of Amtagvi. >Lilit Karapetyan, MD, MS of H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute stated, “The real-world response rate builds on existing clinical data and supports consideration of lifileucel as soon as possible after immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. An overall response rate of 44% was observed in the full cohort, with a 52% response rate among patients treated in earlier lines of therapy. I am encouraged by the potential for an increasing number of patients to benefit as adoption of TIL therapy continues.” >Daniel Kirby, Chief Commercial Officer of Iovance, stated, “The real world Amtagvi data with impressive response rates, paired with unprecedented five-year durability and survival data, demonstrate a best-in-class profile and better outcomes in patients treated earlier.” >Previously treated advanced melanoma represents an unmet medical need with more than 8,000 annual U.S. deaths.^(1) More than half of patients treated with first line standard of care will progress within 12 months.^(2) The U.S. FDA granted accelerated approval for Amtagvi in February 2024 based on ORR and duration of response (DOR) from the C-144-01 clinical trial. The published [final five-year analysis](https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO-25-00765) demonstrated unprecedented durability and follow-up in previously treated advanced melanoma patients, with \~31% ORR, median DOR of 36+ months, and a 20% five-year overall survival.^(3) Iovance is conducting TILVANCE-301, a Phase 3 clinical trial in frontline advanced melanoma, to confirm clinical benefit. >1. National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. 2025 Estimates. [https://seer.cancer.gov](https://seer.cancer.gov/) (accessed February 2026) 2. Larkin J, et al. NEJM; Robert C, et al. Lancet; Tawbi HA, et al. NEJM 3. Medina T, et al. JCO Source: [https://ir.iovance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/best-class-real-world-data-support-early-amtagvir-treatment](https://ir.iovance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/best-class-real-world-data-support-early-amtagvir-treatment) **Using what made Amtagvi/ lifileucel successful, Iova has made positive in-road into cell therapy for soft tissue sarcomas with a high 50% ORR.** >Iovance Announces Positive Results from the First Clinical Trial for TIL Cell Therapy in Soft Tissue Sarcomas *50% Objective Response Rate (ORR) in Advanced Sarcomas* >*Significant Market Opportunity with More than 8,000 Patients Diagnosed* *Annually in the U.S. and Europe* >SAN CARLOS, Calif., Feb. 24, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: IOVA), a commercial biotechnology company focused on innovating, developing, and delivering novel polyclonal tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapies for patients with cancer, today announced positive early data from a [pilot clinical trial](https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05607095?cond=sarcoma&intr=TIL&rank=6) led by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and supported by Iovance of lifileucel in patients with advanced (metastatic or unresectable) undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) or dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) who were refractory to at least one prior line of systemic therapy. >Among the first six evaluable patients treated with lifileucel monotherapy, physician-assessed confirmed ORR by RECIST v1.1 was 50%. All evaluable patients had advanced disease, were refractory to prior therapy, and had significant disease burden, with a mean sum of diameters of 117 millimeters at baseline and a mean of more than two prior lines of therapy. Patients experienced deep responses that improved over time, consistent with lifileucel in melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, and other solid tumors. The safety profile was favorable and consistent with lifileucel therapy in other indications. Based on these results, Iovance plans to commence a single arm registrational trial in second-line advanced UPS and DDLPS in the second quarter of 2026 and will engage with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on an accelerated path to expedite approval. Iovance also plans to explore lifileucel in other high grade soft tissue sarcoma subtypes with high unmet need as part of its clinical development program. >UPS and DDLPS are high grade, aggressive soft tissue sarcomas associated with poor prognosis that impact more than 3,000 patients in the U.S. and more than 5,000 patients in Europe annually, including more than 3,500 patients with advanced disease.^(1-3) There is a high unmet medical need for new treatment options for second-line patients with recent clinical studies reporting ORRs of less than 5%, median progression-free survival (mPFS) of \~2-3 months, and median overall survival (mOS) of \~9-10 months.^(4-6) >Lauren Baker Banks, MD, PhD, Sarcoma Medical Oncologist, MSKCC, stated, “In the first clinical trial of a TIL cell therapy in UPS and DDLPS, one-time treatment with lifileucel demonstrated compelling and unprecedented response rates with the potential to address a significant unmet need in patients who are refractory to frontline standard of care. Patients with UPS and DDLPS suffer from high disease burden, poor quality of life, and a lack of effective treatments, including no approved immunotherapy options. In the second-line setting, mPFS for many patients is only a few months with mOS less than a year. We look forward to presenting these results at a medical conference in 2026.” >Dr. Brian Gastman, EVP Translational Medicine and Research at Iovance, stated, “The exciting clinical results show that lifileucel could offer a new, highly efficacious, and durable immunotherapy option in two aggressive forms of advanced sarcoma and further illustrate the promise of our TIL cell therapy platform to offer meaningful clinical benefit in multiple solid tumor cancers. Chemotherapy with extremely poor efficacy remains the second-line standard of care for these patients after progression on front-line chemotherapy. We look forward to bringing lifileucel to UPS and DDPLS patients as quickly as possible.” Source: [https://ir.iovance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/iovance-announces-positive-results-first-clinical-trial-til-cell](https://ir.iovance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/iovance-announces-positive-results-first-clinical-trial-til-cell) More: [https://ir.iovance.com/news-events/press-releases](https://ir.iovance.com/news-events/press-releases)

jazzgrackle

All of them, if you dream. I’m trading PD, CEVA, playing out my SPY call, and looking into that leveraged semiconductor ETF. So don’t do any of that. You’ll go broke.

Epochium

Switzerland's ACIU could become the next huge biotech/pharmaceutical company. The recent pause of enrollment for Janssen's/ACIU's ACI-35 mild cognitive impairment (patient stage) phase 2b AD is irrelevant (although tau has not been solved universally) - it hit the immunogenicity threshold - it verifies the supra antigen platform. The main trial results are coming this summer for ACIU's 7104 (wholly owned) early stage Parkinson's. With prior incredible results from phase 2 part 1 (Dec 11, 2025) - to have 500x higher levels in the CSF compared to placebo is effectively unheard of in this field. It suggests they have solved the "delivery problem" that plagues passive antibodies. If the drug fails now, it will not be because it did not get to the crime scene - it will be because the mechanism itself is flawed (which the NfL data suggests is unlikely). In addition, the clinical and scientific board they have assembled essentially wrote the clinical trials playbook, which should help ensure they do not make the same mistakes that others (like Roche) have made. Great buying opportunity. If results continue to be great, ACIU will do around $6 billion in sales times a 10 P/S = $60 billion market cap (not including AD portfolio) - compared to ~$280 million market cap ($91 million cash). The market is really not valuing ACIU right. They also have a no noticeable symptoms (patient stage) AD phase (amyloid) 1b/2 trial with Janssen (ACI-24), with results in the first half of this year, with potential milestones up to $2.1 billion and tiered double digit royalties. They also just had news about a partnership with Eli Lilly (a $1 trillion company) - up to $1.7 billion in milestones and tiered double digit royalties. Analyst average price target is $9. They also have a partnership with Takeda. A Potentially Different Regulatory Path One underappreciated aspect of ACI-7104 is its adaptive clinical design. The ongoing study is structured to: - Expand cohorts - Add additional patients - Refine dosing and signals in real time This matters because regulators increasingly allow: - Seamless Phase 2 to Phase 3 transitions - Or even registration-enabling studies if the data is strong enough Given: - Biomarker stabilization - Clinical signal - Strong safety It raises a reasonable question: Could this program advance without a traditional, long, standalone Phase 3? That will ultimately be determined in discussions with regulators, but the design and early data leave that door open Dr. Andrea Pfeifer, CEO of AC Immune SA, commented: “The interim Phase 2 data shows the potential of our ACI-7104.056 active immunotherapy to slow the progression of Parkinson’s disease and hold the promise of a tremendous step forward for millions of patients. The consistent signs of efficacy, combined with the continuing strong safety record, underline ACI-7104.056’s potential to transform PD treatment and are a strong basis for accelerating development. We will discuss ACI-7104.056 with the regulators to establish a clinical development plan towards registration.”.

MediumSinger8088

Late night reflection from an old guy (is 55 old?) with perhaps a rare if not unique perspective. Please bear with me for a moment, I'm going somewhere with this. When I was growing up in the 1970s-80s, the life expectancy for a child born with cystic fibrosis was 5 years. Five years. As late as 2005 only 5 states tested neonates for cystic fibrosis because there wasn't much to do about it: No disease-modifying treatments. Hit them with mucolytics and aggressively manage infections, that's it. I remember seeing a poster when I was a wet-behind-the-years postdoc at a FASEB meeting in the mid-90s by a crappy little company called Vertex Pharma that was trading at several bucks a share. They were trying to develop small molecules to help proteins fold better in diseases like cystic fibrosis and I thought "My goodness THAT is where I should put my money"... except (1) I had almost no money; (2) what money I had I invested in trying to fix my crappy used car and get laid, and (3) I didn't believe in my own financial good judgement. This perhaps was the worst financial mistake I ever made. Fast forward to 2025 when Vertex is a 112 BILLION DOLLAR COMPANY; 4th gen CFTR folding helpers have reached a point where, in the case of the most common CF variant (F508del) the life expectancy of a child who begins taking them by age 15 IS NO DIFFERENT THAN THE POPULATION AVERAGE. Read that again: Kids who would have died at 5 years old when I was a kid are living full lives, getting married, starting businesses, all the good stuff. Because that science worked. Now GANX is doing the SAME CONCEPTUAL THING for Parkinson's disease, with a platform that can feasibly expand to Alzheimer's disease. Don't trust me? Consider from ChatGPT5.2 query "Is there an analogy between the mechanism of action of glucocerebrosidase folding chaperones being developed by Gain pharmaceuticals and the compounds that Vertex developed for cystic fibrosis years ago?" Answer: https://preview.redd.it/c1v7l4cw1hvg1.png?width=1008&format=png&auto=webp&s=597d7ebed9cb97afd8e011b8f978b24f3e0a5318 The risk, of course, is that CNS indications are a much harder proving ground than CF, and financing today is a devilishly harder thing than it was in the 1990s. Nonetheless... Vertex Pharma had about $800 million market cap around 1995. I would have realized a 140-fold gain had I invested in Vertex in the mid 1990s. Now consider: PD market alone is 20-FOLD greater than cystic fibrosis market. Yet literally the same concept: A small molecule that can help a busted protein fold up better and work right. Now consider the initial human studies appear to have arrested disease at least in a subset of PD patients with the right genetic susceptibility. And the $GANX market cap is below $100 million. Wrap your head around that if you will. If Gain is successful, it would imply a 3,000-fold return over 25 years (historical return from Vertex over the same time period x prevalence ratio of PD to cystic fibrosis). $10,000 (two ounces of gold bullion)--> $30,000,000. Sure the risks are high, dilution, logic means diddly-squat in today's market, but if logic means ANYTHING the risk/reward ratio is hugely attractive. In my humble opinion... but not a historically uniformed opinion. The difference now is I can afford to bet tens of thousands of dollars on this horse, and I have, accepting that I may lose it, and any significant capital appreciation likely only will be realized by my kids a couple decades from now. Would you hazard $10K on a couple ounces of gold for an inflation hedge (I have... on more than a couple ounces)? Are you interested in high risk/reward life science technology? If so, this is the place for you.

Correct_Proposal_409

Hey-- I'm waiting. For me, nothing has changed on the science and the potential, so there's nothing to do but buy, sell, or hold. I already have a very large position, otherwise I'd be adding on the dips. The only other consideration is whether you think there is an opportunity cost of holding. I keep going back to this: there is no other drug that has shown the ability to reduce GluSph to the extent or reliability that GT-02287 has shown. This is a primary role of Gcase, and 2287 is designed to make Gcase function effectively, so mission accomplished there. There are a large number of PD patients, GBA1 and idiopathic who have elevated levels of this toxic lipid. And outside of PD, there are patients with DLB and Gaucher's who also have elevated levels. Even as a therapy that is part of a broader approach to one or more of these diseases, being able to reduce GluSph is very valuable-- or at least will be at some point. I do believe that the extension patients who had elevated levels of GluSph will continue to show durability and separation as compared to the patients who were not elevated at baseline. And if all patients continue to show durability, that's even better. Phase 2 funding remains a question, but I believe the company has a plan and know what they are holding.

WinterIsComing305

I feel like you’re missing a lot of context bud. Yes, Amtagvi costs about ~$560k — that part is true.Yes, ~20% of patients are alive at 5 years, and median OS is ~13.9 months — also true. What’s missing is who these patients were.These were heavily pre‑treated metastatic melanoma patients who had already failed PD‑1 therapy (and BRAF/MEK when applicable). Historically, in this setting, median survival was ~6–9 months and long‑term survivors were extremely rare. Against that backdrop: A ~14‑month median OS is an improvement, not a disappointment. ~20% 5‑year survival in a PD‑1‑refractory population is unprecedented, and no chemo or targeted option shows anything close. Among responders, durable remissions lasting 3–5+ years are common, and many patients required no further therapy. Also important: median survival is a poor metric for immunotherapy. The real value of TIL therapy is the tail of the curve — patients who effectively achieve long‑term control after a one‑time treatment, not chronic dosing for years. No one is claiming Amtagvi is “the answer for all melanoma.” It’s approved as a late‑line option for patients with no good alternatives — and for a meaningful subset of them, it has genuinely been the answer.

Fun-Valuable-7355

Schizo take: P Diddy was elite comms. PD = PetroDollar ..giving signal to hoarde oil

Poopin4days

Exactly. In our corp culture now you self report. If you don't then you might get PD or escalation to e&c.

Epochium

It was hard to know what sectors would do well 12 months ago, but it's obvious we're in a bull market due to AI Tech has run a lot already, so I want exposure to the best biotech out there: Switzerland's ACIU could become the next huge biotech/pharmaceutical company... The recent pause of enrollment for Janssen's/ACIU's ACI-24 mild cognitive impairment (patient stage) phase 2b AD is irrelevant (although tau has not been solved universally) - it hit the immunogenicity threshold - it verifies the supra antigen platform. The main trial results are coming this summer for ACIU's 7104 (wholly owned) early stage Parkinson's. With prior incredible results from phase 2 part 1 (Dec 11, 2025) - to have 500x higher levels in the CSF compared to placebo is effectively unheard of in this field. It suggests they have solved the "delivery problem" that plagues passive antibodies. If the drug fails now, it will not be because it did not get to the crime scene - it will be because the mechanism itself is flawed (which the NfL data suggests is unlikely). In addition, the clinical and scientific board they have assembled essentially wrote the clinical trials playbook, which should help ensure they do not make the same mistakes that others (like Roche) have made. Great buying opportunity. If results continue to be great, ACIU will do around $6 billion in sales times a 10 P/S = $60 billion market cap (not including AD portfolio) - compared to ~$280 million market cap ($91 million cash). The market is really not valuing ACIU right. They also have a no noticeable symptoms (patient stage) AD phase (amyloid) 1b/2 trial with Janssen (ACI-24), with results in the first half of this year, with potential milestones up to $2.1 billion and tiered double digit royalties. They also just had news about a partnership with Eli Lilly (a $1 trillion company) - up to $1.7 billion in milestones and tiered double digit royalties. Analyst average price target is $9. They also have a partnership with Takeda. A Potentially Different Regulatory Path One underappreciated aspect of ACI-7104 is its adaptive clinical design. The ongoing study is structured to: - Expand cohorts - Add additional patients - Refine dosing and signals in real time This matters because regulators increasingly allow: - Seamless Phase 2 to Phase 3 transitions - Or even registration-enabling studies if the data is strong enough Given: - Biomarker stabilization - Clinical signal - Strong safety It raises a reasonable question: Could this program advance without a traditional, long, standalone Phase 3? That will ultimately be determined in discussions with regulators, but the design and early data leave that door open. Dr. Andrea Pfeifer, CEO of AC Immune SA, commented: “The interim Phase 2 data shows the potential of our ACI-7104.056 active immunotherapy to slow the progression of Parkinson’s disease and hold the promise of a tremendous step forward for millions of patients. The consistent signs of efficacy, combined with the continuing strong safety record, underline ACI-7104.056’s potential to transform PD treatment and are a strong basis for accelerating development. We will discuss ACI-7104.056 with the regulators to establish a clinical development plan towards registration.”

Fragrant_Box_697

And then get arrested again for making false claims to the PD😂😂😂 Yall make the dumbest decisions then get upset when cops are at your door

MitsotakiShogun

Training may be expensive, but inference isn't. Rent a single B200 instance and try serving MiniMax-2.5 to a hundred or so concurrent users, then calculate the cost per 1M tokens and compare to API pricing. You'll see their margins on that are anything but thin, and the big providers use a bunch of other tricks that scale even better on multiple instances (e.g. PD disaggregation, speculative decoding, multi-tier KV caching, etc).

_hiddenscout

Bought some KN this morning. Interesting little under the radar company. Fundamentals fit into the GARPy side of things to me. https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/kn/statistics/ Description of what they do > Knowles Corporation offers capacitors, radio frequency (RF) and microwave filters, balanced armature speakers, and medtech microphones in Asia, the United States, Europe, rest of Americas, and internationally. > It operates in two segments, Precision Devices (PD) and Medtech & Specialty Audio (MSA). The PD segment focuses on the custom design and delivery of high performance capacitor products and RF solutions primarily serving the defense, industrial, medtech, and electrification/energy markets. Sold off some of their lower margin legacy business to focus on higher margin stuff around industrial and aerospace.

hombredesal

LASE and GANX seem like interesting stocks. Any thoughts? LASE’s main service/product is using lasers to clean things. In recent months, they’ve been trying to signal their expansion into defense, e.g., a meeting with Congressman Cory Mills —a member of the House Armed Services Committee back in January 2026, and plans to participate in Accelerator Alley SOF week in May 2026 to show off Laser-Shield Anti-Drone system. Also, on 3/18/26, the company released some PR on their site announcing they’re collaborating with Brokk on a laser-cleaning robot for remote nuclear decontamination. Issues: preliminary 2025 financial report from March 10th looked promising, but operating margins and revenue have historically been pretty bad. A lot of money is always being spent on marketing and hiring staff members. Recent warrants. GANX is technically yet another pre-revenue biotech. Their focus is Parkinson’s Disease (PD) and the science looks really good. Lead drug is in Phase 1B. The CEO (Gene Mack) has mentioned a few times not being interested in funding Phase 2 themselves. Regardless of how that plays out, an IND will be submitted soon according to him. The cool thing here is that they discovered the lead drug using their AI-powered drug discovery platform called, “Magellan”. Issues: pre-revenue biotech and all that comes with it.

DawctorMe

Nice DD again. You mention Keytruda as a potential trajectory, but not as a potential GPS partner. Merck and Sellas did the PT resistant ovarian trial, where merck supplied Keytruda for the trial. Do you think there's potential on Merck also being interested in (atleast) GPS? Biologically the PD1 + GPS combo seems like a good pair. Sorry if you've adressed this in your other posts or comments. I have not had the time to read through it all.

Any_Pomegranate1134

$INMB : everyone is betting this Xpro1595 to pass the trial to phase 3 Positive catalysts (upward pressure): Alzheimer's program progress: FDA alignment on Phase 2b/3 trial design for XPro1595 (MINDFuL trial data presented as a successful example of inflammation-targeted Alzheimer's trials at the AD/PD 2026 conference in March). This was highlighted in plenary sessions and news, reinforcing the biomarker-driven approach. Analyst upgrades: Lucid Capital Markets upgraded to Buy from Neutral in March 2026, raising price target from $2 to $9 (citing expanded pipeline, especially CORDStrom for RDEB, and potential in Alzheimer's).

ChinaHandy

Yes, back in November. Here is what my AI has to say: The At-the-Market (ATM) offering for Gain Therapeutics (GANX) is a critical piece of their financial structure that explains why the stock struggles to sustain rallies despite excellent clinical data. As of March 18, 2026, here is the expanded breakdown of the ATM size and its impact: 1. The Total Capacity: $35.5 Million In late November 2025, Gain Therapeutics filed a prospectus supplement for an ATM program totaling up to $35,530,980. * The Mechanism: Unlike a traditional "underwritten" offering where a block of shares is sold all at once at a fixed (usually discounted) price, an ATM allows GANX to sell shares "into the tape" at current market prices whenever they need cash. * The Partner: They are using Oppenheimer & Co. as the sales agent for this program. 2. Relative Size vs. Market Cap To understand why this is a "heavy" offering, look at the proportions: * Market Cap: As of March 2026, GANX has a market cap of approximately $110 million. * Dilution Potential: A $35.5 million offering represents roughly 32% of the company's total value. If the company were to exhaust the entire ATM at current prices (around $2.50–$2.80), they would need to issue roughly 13 to 14 million new shares. * Current Share Count: The company currently has approximately 38.5 million shares outstanding. Fully utilizing the ATM would increase that count by more than a third. 3. Why the ATM is "Capping" the Stock The ATM creates a phenomenon known as an "Overhang." * The Ceiling: Every time the stock price spikes on good news (like today's AD/PD conference data), the company has a massive incentive to sell shares via the ATM to bolster their $8.8 million cash pile. * Market Absorption: When the company sells into a rally, it effectively "soaks up" the buying demand. This is likely why we see "positive news" followed by a flat or downward price move—the company may be using the liquidity to raise the funds necessary for their upcoming Phase 2 trial in Q3 2026. 4. Financial Necessity The reason GANX is maintaining such a large ATM is their "burn rate." * The "Going Concern" Risk: In their Q3 2025 filing, auditors noted a "going concern" risk because their cash only lasted into early 2026. * The Solution: The $35.5M ATM, combined with a previous $7M raise, is designed to bridge the gap to late 2026 or early 2027. Summary of Offering Impact | Feature | Detail | |---|---| | Total ATM Limit | $35,530,980 | | Current Status | Active (ongoing sales likely during high-volume weeks) | | Primary Goal | Fund Phase 2 trial launch (Q3 2026) | | Investor Risk | Continued "sell-side" pressure on green days | Next Step: The actual number of shares sold through the ATM so far will be revealed in their March 26 earnings report.

windstride3

Honestly, from what I can tell - nothing. The company CMO presented at a conference in Copenhagen on "safety, tolerability, biomarkers, and clinical scores from the completed Part 1 of the study support continued development of GT-02287 for PD. Of the 19 participants who completed dosing in Part 1, 16 chose to continue in the ongoing nine-month extension (Part 2), further supporting the tolerability of GT-02287. A Data Monitoring Committee meeting on March 5, 2026, concluded that the study should continue without any changes."

EffectiveSlacker

Omg favourable news for us CGTX shareholders Cognition Therapeutics Presents Promising Phase 2 Results of Zervimesine for Dementia With Lewy Bodies at AD/PD 2026 Conference

Correct_Proposal_409

From today's press release. Companies are very careful about using "disease-modifying" in their press-releases, especially in the context of the following sentence. The data fully justifies this statement IMO, and if anything, they are still being conservative with their wording: “The data from our Phase 1b study furthers our hypothesis that GT-02287 is among the first disease-modifying therapies promising to shift the treatment paradigm in PD from symptom relief to halting or slowing symptom progression, targeting the causative biology (or pathophysiology) of PD to enable a more durable and predictable treatment effect for those living with PD.”

microcapreturns

If you look at just the 6 high GluSph patients they actually improved by 6 points on the UPDRS scale in 90 days. If you take out the two outliers the 11 other patients actually improved by almost 5 points. Thats excellent results. Expecting DDC biomarker data at AD/PD that could be first of its kind. https://preview.redd.it/6nnoqryruiog1.jpeg?width=1439&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d6fd40fff6f37347d60e45e1a6fa3684093dae17

Any_Pomegranate1134

**MGNX (MacroGenics, Inc.)** is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on developing antibody-based therapeutics for cancer treatment. Recent developments include: * The FDA placed a **partial clinical hold** on the Phase 2 LINNET trial for lorigerlimab (a bispecific DART molecule targeting PD-1 and CTLA-4) in gynecologic cancers around late February 2026. This paused enrollment of new study participants. Some sources indicate the hold was later lifted, contributing to a recent stock gain (e.g., up \~4% in one session)

microcapreturns

https://preview.redd.it/o6ukkb5q4ung1.jpeg?width=1439&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=719486cc9cfded7c43b9fcf86cf16e2472267507 The DDC biomarker being shown at AD/PD will be conclusive since the company has stated it correlates with the statistically significant data presented to date on UPDRS. Can't argue with statistically significant data if you understand the science.

microcapreturns

I see. I agree AD/PD is a huge catalyst. The way you wrote it I thought you were saying a PR was needed. Obviously not when up 20% for a week with crashing markets.

MediumSinger8088

Catalysts are small events that trigger a bit of buying/selling at key times leading to algorithmic amplification to the upside or downside. The AD/PD conference has been anticipated for months by many of us. It is logical to anticipate a decent probability of data update in the ongoing study. Data are nearing statistical significance on part 3 so the situation is primed for a break to the upside or downside. It's curious that we have a surge when the general market is being pulled down. On the other hand, Gain seems to trade like a software-as-a-service-stock, mirroring Nasdaq motion, rather than on fundamentals to the technology or industry specific trends.

microcapreturns

Great job. Stock should move up before AD/PD in a few weeks. Here was my recent article. https://www.reddit.com/r/pennystocks/s/mdUiShNRh4

eamus_catuli

In case you think the price of oil is going to stabilize soon. [Retired US Navy Admiral and former Supreme Commander of NATO](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-03-05/us-iran-conflict-tehran-can-make-the-persian-gulf-a-minefield?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc3MjcwODY2NiwiZXhwIjoxNzczMzEzNDY2LCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJUQkVUVzVLSVAzSTgwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiIxODJBRTAzNUY2NDc0ODkwODhEM0VCRUVGRUUzQkJFMiJ9.wzma2PD5XIwUIq6pt6HvSB2mOpbUxcbLNisqSVLNwC8&leadSource=uverify%20wall): > Iran used mines four decades ago against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. It has been planning a Strait of Hormuz closure operation for decades and probably has more than 5,000 mines; just one hit can severely damage a thin-skinned tanker. The Iranians can lay them covertly with small boats, diesel submarines and even civilian craft such as the ubiquitous dhows of the Gulf.

Icy-Bullfrog1891

Really looking forward to the AD/PD event. Really exciting time for Parkinson’s patients and Gain. Between this new biomarker data, and the new UPDRS data (I think Gene said we’d be getting that in a few months???), it’s just a matter of time.

microcapreturns

All it takes is convincing one big pharma that it works and a deal will get done. The DDC data will be huge at AD/PD.

proret4rd

PD ready to squeeze

proret4rd

All in on PD. Saas ain't done

microcapreturns

Look at Gain Therapeutics ($GANX). First small molecule drug that has been able to reverse Parkinson's and they present data in 2 weeks at AD/PD. Nobody has ever heard of them and these are in patient results. https://www.reddit.com/r/pennystocks/s/TscnH8yA9A

microcapreturns

GT-02287 is actually correcting the problem and will show data at AD/PD on how they repair dieing neurons. That's incredible news.

microcapreturns

Just read another published article yesterday showing DDC is an accurate biomarker for both PD and Lewy Body. Gains GT-02287 acts at the beginning of the problem and repairs neurons and reverses Parkinsons. Everybody else's drug works downstream and won't impact the DDC biomarker. It stands alone.

Correct_Proposal_409

I agree that GBA1 is the low hanging fruit. However, interestingly, only two of the high GluShp group were GBA1 (the only two GBA1 severe in the trial). The rest were idiopathic cases, which means that there are likely a large percentage of idiopathic cases with high GluSph. Since GluSph has only recently been able to be accurately measured in the CSF, this is something of a new discovery. One data point, but an important one. Since there is known association with and causation of dysfunction in various cellular areas (ER stress, a-syn aggregation, lysosomal & mitochondrial dysfunction), if all patients with high GluSph, regardless of genetic mutation, benefit from reduction in GluSph, this opens up the TAM by a large amount. GBA1 is somewhere in the 10-15% of PD cases, but perhaps 25-50+% of idiopathic cases either have or will develop high GluSph. The important thing is that this is not an obscure, downstream marker. This is an upstream, toxic lipid that feeds or possibly even initiates (i.e., GBA1 due to Gcase deficiency) the neurodegenerative doom loop.

R1ckMartel

You should really not hypothesize about things you have no knowledge of. Between PD-1 and PDL-1 alone, there are over ten available agents. Imfinzi has been FDA approved for almost a decade now. Its use is a fraction of Keytruda in clinical practice. It is not taking meaningful marketshare from Keytruda. Merck also recently had a subcutaneous Keytruda formulation approved, which will reduce chair time (not that Keytruda is bad at 30 minutes per infusion). When Keytruda's patent expires, a number of biosomilars will rush to market and that will hurt, but I don't think you have enough knowledge of the space to conjecture on immunotherapy.

Correct_Proposal_409

\~45% of the patients had high GluSph at baseline, and were then reduced by 81% to near normal levels. In those same patients, there was a statistically significant improvement in UPDRS (II/III combined) scores of 6.17 points in 90 days. Statistically significant. But this is not promising to you. What if they were to show DOPA decarboxylase drop in this same group? Sounds like they have this too based on the CEO's statements (to be revealed at AD/PD). I'd imagine they'll have plasma NfL soon in the extension patients. Bet you won't be impressed if that shows stabilization.

Correct_Proposal_409

So you have nothing to offer in terms of explaining why you think increasing the effectiveness of Gcase to reach multiple cellular compartments will not help a portion of PD patients. Got it. Not even in GBA1 patients, which have a mutation affecting Gcase. Lol. The share price is up from a year ago, so you have that wrong too. You know as well as I do that small many small biotechs have been hammered over the past couple of years. And you must not have much experience in investing if you think that markets get stocks right at every point in time. This is silly. My most successful investments have been in companies that have promise fundamentally but that had not yet been discovered by the general investing public. This is very common. This is called alpha. And you either know this and are being disingenuous or you simply are ignorant to this. Maybe your investment style is to buy well-known companies after everyone else has. You keep repeating the same "bagholder" line. My average cost is \~1.85. I'm doing fine, and don't need to offload anything. BTW, institutional ownership has gone up quite a bit, but still has a ways to go. https://preview.redd.it/lltd9ruaxolg1.png?width=1336&format=png&auto=webp&s=9ebe3455f67174db75e77d37d44496e030fb2c88

Correct_Proposal_409

You can use your own rhetorical "many trials have failed and therefore this is destined for failure" for any therapy being developed. Historical failure rates raise the bar, but they don't determine the outcome of a mechanistically unique therapy with a demonstrated CNS pathway correction. Here we have a genetically validated pathway (GBA1), plus strong evidence of Gcase dysfunction and corresponding lysosomal lipid accumulation in a good portion of idiopathic cases. If you are an MD, you should understand the relevance of GBA1 PD and Gaucher's-- they share the same GBA1 mutation. Life-saving, disease-modification was achieved by addressing dysfunctional Gcase, with GluSph being the most important biomarker for confirmation of target-engagement and disease progression. Of course, these Gaucher's therapies do not cross the blood-brain barrier. GT-02287 addresses dysfunctional Gcase in the brain. The reasonable take would be, "let's see how reducing GluSph levels translates to reduction in downstream biomarkers and in clinical symptoms in Parkinson's cases over a longer timeframe." Not, "I'll eat my shoes if this works". Hard to take you seriously when you are so seemingly dismissive without offering mechanistic reasoning to back up your statements. It almost seems as if you want it to fail. Do you work for a competitor of Gain? That would explain it. "Your post history is rabid with support of this stock... you are looking for someone to buy your bags." This is an immature, ad hominem assumption that does not address the science. Yes, I believe strongly in this treatment. I think it is the most promising PD treatment being developed, for the reasons I've detailed in my many posts. I'm lucky to have a very low basis. I *am* looking for BP to buy my shares for multiples above by basis. Not retail investors. I won't convince you-- not trying to convince you. But readers should understand that your baseless dismissal has no bearing on what many experts think is a very promising development in Parkinson's disease treatment. Maybe we should follow-up in September and see how durable the data is with the 16 out of 19 patients who elected to continue with the treatment despite the tests and additional lumbar puncture, many of whom have reported improvements, along with their clinicians. Beyond UPDRS, some of these reports may be anecdotal, but if they truly have regained sense of smell, this does not happen with placebo.

MediumSinger8088

Calling the shot Anybody can make a claim post-hoc. I'm posting expectations and we'll see if data is presented that substantiates the optimistic scenario. IMO the most relevant data is MDS-UPDRS part 3 (clinical evaluations) in the ongoing studies. Minimal clinically important difference is about 3.5 points. If the difference from reported - historical expected exceeds this, it's justification for confidence. By my tally last updated data was -3.1 before Christmas. If the AD/PD conference data shows the same or increased value, then Bayesian statistical interpretation favors "drug works". Basically take the 90 day expected MDS-UPDRS, double it, you get 1.26. Take the 180 day MDS-UPDRS difference from baseline. Subtract and assess the delta. It ain't rocket surgery. I'm calling my own personal criteria for continued investment before the data are released. NOT AFTER ... before. https://preview.redd.it/vtpqut3idklg1.png?width=1007&format=png&auto=webp&s=9b1c19db141517643f428bbc1dbb3c9288284dae

MediumSinger8088

Some time ago I posted my "play at home score sheet" with call-shots on MDS-UPDRS part 3 changes. When/if new updates are released in mid-march at the international AD/PD conference I'll update and post the progress.

Correct_Proposal_409

1. Karl Kieburtz, M.D., M.PH., and Kenneth Marek, M.D., two of the top experts in the world on Parkinson’s, lysosomal disorders, and neurodegenerative diseases would strongly disagree with you about GluSph. I doubt you’ll take the time, but you can watch them discuss the GluSph results here: [https://lifescievents.com/event/gst492thwp/](https://lifescievents.com/event/gst492thwp/) 2. Of course Gaucher’s is not Parkinson’s, but they share core overlaps in lysosomal dysfunction, in which GluSph plays a key role. There are plenty of papers out there. Here’s one on GluSph promoting a-syn pathology: [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5628407/](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5628407/)  Here’s another paper that discusses GluSph and Parkinson’s (and DLB): [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41531-024-00820-0](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41531-024-00820-0) 3. GluSph was prespecified for this trial by key opinion leaders and along with the FDA. GluSph reduction was one of, if not the top priority for biomarkers, since it means (1) that Gcase is doing its job effectively, and (2) because GluSph is known to cause a-syn aggregation, ER stress, lysosomal dysfunction, and mitochondrial dysfunction. You saying GluSph speculative is ignorance of the science and runs contrary to what the experts are saying. 4. The data was neither “heavily selected” nor anecdotal. You can’t fake GluSph reductions, and among that group, which is a large percentage of the patients, the UPDRS improvements are statistically significant. What is anecdotal at this point are the patients who reported improvements in their sense of smell and balance. Gain has added smell tests to the phase 2 so that this will no longer be anecdotal. 5. Liraglutide was an indirect metabolic approach. This is direct enzyme stabilization in a genetically validated pathway. 6. The links to the Reddit posts are my posts. These were all backed by research. Be skeptical, that’s healthy. But dismissing upstream lysosomal correction in PD as “speculative” ignores a large body of mechanistic literature.

Correct_Proposal_409

I don't think the market is pricing in any big reveals tomorrow. It cannot be viewed live, so we'll have to wait for a replay. But Gain continues to talk with partners. A deal will get done, the only questions are when and for how much. We'll get new data at AD/PD in a few weeks, and likely durability data from the extension at some point. My guess is that they've already shared the 180 day durability data (which they've not shared publicly yet). Maybe the word is getting out, and that's what we're seeing today. Plus some short covering. I continue to believe this is the most promising small cap biotech investment available today that most of the market still doesn't know exists. If the extension patients continue to show durable data, it's game on.

Correct_Proposal_409

Maybe we'll learn something new, or at least get some hints. We know there will be new data at AD/PD next month.

noahloveshiscats

Not really. [https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260204PD210/market-dram-nand-cxmt-ddr4.html](https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260204PD210/market-dram-nand-cxmt-ddr4.html)

Pipes255

OP backtested not even 4 years of data HA. In stats and backtests, 4 years is completely worthless. You’re gonna blow up like capn condor with these so called “stats”. Also, “very poorly” and “quite well” are not percentages. Back to the desk, back to work, get the true stats or be nothing. Here are some stats that matter. -98% of the time, one side of initial balance (IB) is broken. -95% of the time, one side of overnight (ON) range is tested. -83% of the time, one side of prior day range (PD) is broken. -80% of the time, the half gap (50% RTH gap) is tested. -55% of the time, the previous gap has been closed. -72% of the RTH days are Normal days (Bimodal/Trimodal). -18% of the RTH days are Trend days (Multimodal Profiles). -10% of the RTH days are Neutral days (Inside ON Range) Good luck out there degens!

Correct_Proposal_409

Take this for what it is worth, as you do not know me. I’ve spent a ton of time on this company and the data and the science over the last couple of years. While I was wrong about how the market would react to the phase 1b data, the data so far has been what was predicted by pre-clinical models and what science knows about Parkinson’s pathology, although this is still being sharpened. They have new data in hand, some of which is from the first 90 days of the 1b and which they’ll be sharing at AD/PD (and so it must be solid), and they also must have data from the first 90 day of the extension. All of their recent language tells me it is good. And this jives with recent direct and indirect communications with the company. Since the CEO made the statement about being more convinced each day that they have the first disease-modifying drug, he and the team have only become more confident. The problem with the price is that it is mostly retail-driven, and retail doesn’t understand the data or doesn’t have a long-enough attention span to stay invested. But this does not mean for a second that pharma partners are not interested and that they are not talking. They are talking. You are right that much of this will hinge on the “durability” of the data in the extension (i.e., does it continue to hold up over time). I strongly believe they already have some durability data as I said before. There’s no reason to think it won’t continue. I also believe that as-is, right now, a large pharma would pay 2-4X where we are now, and I’m sure there have been conversations, but the Gain team doesn’t think this is enough. I further believe that the bridge between what Gain wants and what BP is willing to pay is built with the durability data. So sometime before September, Gain will have this data, and they’ll be able to make a deal. Then the question is how much. I’ve stated many times that I think the deal that makes the most sense is a buyout with CVR. So cash up front, plus investors get to a CVR which they can cash in if the drug gets approves, and I think it will. Investors in this way will participate in the upside, and BP limits risk. I do not think the company will be sold for $200 million, unless the durability data isn’t very convincing. But there’s no reason to think it won’t be. It will not be a “fail”, that I am very confident in.

AdamN

I’ve been loading up on PD. A value stock with customer growth - nothing exotic but the type of thing that big companies keep even in hard times so slow and steady growth of large customers is a positive sign for me.

bobo-the-dodo

Chicago PD will enforce?

rvanasty

Different story just claimed she was released at the scene to local PD.

AmbivalentheAmbivert

Frankly what does local PD have to do with it realistically? Are you saying they need to comb the streets because the police are not cooperating? do they need to go after schools, court houses because police are not cooperating? It's a stupid comment, and realistically what does the average person have to do with it?

chickenpotpie25

Also local PD are working with ICE in these places.

Correct_Proposal_409

I did see that. Mack's quote is great because it very succinctly described how GT-02287 is superior than the other Gcase drugs, and also why (IMO) it is superior to the other treatments being developed which work around the edges by focusing on one cellular process or another. “Rather than simply trying to boost enzyme activity in the lysosome, GT-02287 stabilizes GCase folding and trafficking throughout the cell, restoring function across multiple compartments, including those critical to mitochondrial health,” Mack explained. “That matters because Parkinson’s can be seen as a disease of cellular stress, impaired waste clearance, and energy failure.” I could see a future where GT-02287 is a foundational treatment for many/most PD cases (and other diseases), while other downstream or peripheral treatments like the other ones mentioned are used in conjunction based on specific patient phenotypes or stage of progression.

I_Sniff_Uranus

City PD is a lot different than federal agents with “absolute immunity”

Cat_From_Jupiter

Holy fuck, Maegan out here being slutted out by an entire PD & getting paid $500,000 by taxpayers for it 😂. If this ain't winning Idk what is..

Honest-Muscle-7277

Swing trade in dave inc at 193 usd and hopefully the catalyst about its results I think it can make up bounce it to 220 - 240 usd. Stop 183 usd. I think that trump will not talk about regulations in fintech and based on its growth in eps, clients and revenue. PD: if someone knows the company or thinks another opinion i appreciate if you can reply my comment. Thanks

Correct_Proposal_409

As always, only invest what you are able to lose. That said, long term, I think this is the most promising and most de-risked disease-modifying treatment for PD that is being developed. I just don't know what the share price is going to do over the next few months at this point.

MediumSinger8088

Answering my own question... the standard of care for Gaucher's is enzyme replacement therapy, repeated injections every couple of weeks. For non-neuropathic Gaucher's you couldn't see a clear oral drug effect on top of the ERT and wouldn't get patients to forego the standard of care. Not enough market for neuropathic Gaucher's and if you're going to target CNS might as well go for PD.

MediumSinger8088

Many companies would go for the fast track in an orphan indication and hope to go for the big target after cash flow. Oh well. The only thing I can say is, my precious metals are making up for some of my "un"-Gain lately. Sorry I sold most miners prematurely but my explorer moon shots are doing OK and my real metals are... safe in a safe while we wait for March and the PD conference.

peenoiseAF___

I’m big on tracking catalyst events for biotechs and tools like tic⁤krbio make it way easier to track PD⁤UFA and clinical dates and see what could move a stock without digging through a dozen sites

Correct_Proposal_409

Yeah, I think it was simply that they felt confident in GBA1 Parkinson's, which is much bigger than the unaddressed neurologic Gaucher group. And proving disease modification in PD might open the door to Gaucher's more easily than the other way around.

MediumSinger8088

I have wondered why not prioritize Gauchers over PD. I just assumed it was a "swing for the fences" business decision, knowing that approval for PD would lead to off-label use and future expedited approval for Gaucher's.

MediumSinger8088

That's really interesting and suggests Parkinson's disease is more syndromic than previously appreciated. PD has always existed as part of a "Parkinsonian syndrome" with different presumed triggers but common symptoms. Perhaps there are metabolic subtypes of PD itself, some of which involve defects in lysosomal ceramide metabolism, and some that do not.

MediumSinger8088

This is a pretty good board. Though I respectfully disagree with some posters about the probability of Gain going it alone vs. a partnership vs. selling the company in 2026, the quality of the discussion and consideration of data along with alternative reads on the future, is good - and there are more contributors lately, which is a welcome change. What I'm looking for in terms of data in 2026: I'd love to see MDS-UPDRS part 3 median changes (NOT MEAN, median, which is much more relevant for small numbers in a skewed distribution) from baseline in the continuation study reach an MCID (minimal clinically important difference) of 3.25 relative to historical norms for early PD trials where the drug is started in the "levadopa on" state. Many trials consider -3 as "minimal improvement" and +4 as "minimal worsening" (remember part 3 is a 132 point scale with 18 motor functions assessed by a trained physician, not patient self-reported). Right now the median change from baseline is = -2.56 with an expectation value of +0.6 based on historical norms in a hypothetical placebo group (assumptions: Part 3 change +0.6 every 3 months; +2.4 points / year). Thus we're already at about 3.20 for the delta. So all the MDS-UPDRS need do is stay stable relative to baseline and the delta will increase. THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS HAVING A REAL PLACEBO GROUP and FDA usually discounts historical control comparisons - but meeting such threshold would massively increase my personal confidence that the drug is working. If the estimated difference from historical norms hits 4 or 5, it's a whole new day. Any additional biomarker data present at conferences and so forth would be gravy.

IntradayGuy

Watch the video's he gets pushed/bumped out of the way by her driving and not obeying commands... Im not advocating for her being killed but go do this to your local PD any day of the week you can get dead too by them

MediumSinger8088

AI assist to question of cost for a Phase 2 trial: $15-45 million. A "lean" trial might be $6-15 million. There's a BMJ analysis (2020 Jun 11;10(6):e038863. doi: [10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038863](https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038863)). Much smaller cost than paying market cap + premium. Big pharma would say "cool early work, find the money to prove it out in phase 2 then, if you can, come see us". Or agree to support some cost and provide resources in exchange for exclusive license to market for PD. Something like that. Cheaper than forking out hundreds of millions. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk ... if not for free, for much less cash.

microcapreturns

Since they are at least 180 days in with some patients and they are presenting this data in March at AD/PD I would guess they are happy with it. I expect data to continue to improve and if the nonresponders don't continue in trial the 180 data suddenly gets much better.

microcapreturns

Extension data at AD/PD in March. I also told the company they should have included those 3 and just note no final lumbar tap. It's not pleasant from what I have been told. I also asked about the 3 outliers in the data and they seemed like they knew exactly what was happening. Did you run the data without them in it?

Cautious_Room1910

Forgive me, can you tell me where you read in the publication that only 1 of the participants with a reduction in GluSph is a GBA1 case, 4 are idiopathic, and 2 are other cases? I can’t find this information. First of all, I would like to talk about BIAL: if I’m not mistaken, it is precisely in the PubMed article linked by the other person in the conversation that they show a 2x increase in GCase activity in patients with GBA1 Parkinson’s after 28 days, whereas, although different in the way and consequences, in the case of another drug and phase 1a, GCase activity increased by about 50% with GT. So in sick patients, the BIAL molecule reaches the right tissues and correctly activates GCase (I cannot speculate on whether this results in more or less effect than GT, despite the excellent numbers). This is an extremely promising data point regarding what the drug is precisely trying to achieve (i.e., not preclinical studies in animals that do not have a chronic disease course like in humans and cannot or should not influence proper financial decisions!). Regarding the concern raised by the other user about the transient increase in GluCer with BIAL’s drug, I would not worry, because, as also stated directly in the PDF published by Gain on January 6: page 20, "Reducing GluCer levels has no clinical effect in GBA-PD." In any case, just a few more months to see who will be right regarding the release of the data, noting that, being a private company in an already delicate sector, they are not absolutely required to release biomarker information to the public, and so far this has been the case. Furthermore, their phase 1 study was very short, so if this did not allow presenting useful data, we should at least keep the door open. Now, if it is true that Gain’s data show significant decreases in GluSph even in idiopathic Parkinson’s (I could not find this information), this could slightly change the company’s operational window. However, it is still incorrect to say, as you did, that there is a suggestion from these data that a large number of idiopathic Parkinson’s cases have lysosomal lipid degradation failure as a primary or co-factor… I see only 4 cases, not the majority of the 10+ million Parkinson’s cases recorded worldwide, and therefore, if you cite these as exceptional data, forgive me if I did the same with what I reported above. In conclusion, if GT does not show concrete potential for idiopathic Parkinson’s, it will then have to test its cards on GBA1. BIAL will present phase 2 data in about 3 months, allowing us to conclude the chain, connecting—or not—the increases in GCase functionality to improvement in lysosomal repair function. One cannot invest in BIAL, but are you sure you want to invest in a drug that in 3 months could have a competitor with the same functionalities but 2 years ahead?

Correct_Proposal_409

A couple of things. First, what is interesting about the above slide is that only 1 of the 7 patients who showed a big drop in GluSph is GBA1. 4 of them were idiopathic, and 2 were "other". So this suggest that a large number of idiopathic cases feature lysosomal lipid stress as a primary or contributing factor. Second, GT-02287 is not simply “stabilizing GCase”. The human data now show functional lysosomal repair (large GluSph reductions) with patient-level concordance to clinical improvement. That’s very different from prior GCase approaches that increased protein or activity without correcting toxic lipid accumulation or showing a clear clinical correlation. Regarding BIAL’s program: it is restricted to GBA1-PD, targets a narrower downstream mechanism, and has not shown GluSph reduction or a biomarker-to-clinical linkage like this. Being further along in development doesn’t help if the biology isn’t hitting a disease-relevant bottleneck. Many PD programs have reached Phase 2+ without demonstrating disease modification. Maybe I'm missing this promising data, but from what I've seen, even pre-clinically, it has not shown improvement in mitochondrial function, reduction in a-syn aggregation, reduced neuroinflammation, reduced ER stress. All of these were shown pre-clinically by GT-02287, and now this reduction in GluSph, along with linking it to UPDRS improvements, goes a long way towards validating these pre-clinical findings. Do you have a link to this promising Bial data?

MediumSinger8088

No price moves based on any data. Big players bet millions of $ and make money on a few cent moves. So buy on rumor / sell on news; any analysis is limited to an algo sensing initial price moves. Since Gain didn't cure PD all of a sudden and get FDA approval RTF now, there would be a drop. So long as it isn't 50% in 2 minutes directly after the PR release, it's just about as to be expected.

MediumSinger8088

Purely objective analysis of P3: With this N, nonparametric WIlcoxon ranked signs test, P=0.22; modest sized difference but insufficient N for formal significance at this time point. A significant effect requires longer time and/or larger N; and/or a placebo group. Time more important than N if assessing stabilization vs. worsening on the MDS-UPDRS scale. Median change is now -2.3. AI-assisted analysis of expectation values: Based on historical precedent for de novo PD patients on levadopa therapy, the 1-year expectation value for change in MDS-UPDRS is about +2.4 points or about +0.6 points in 90 days. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is about 3.25 points. So, assuming drug treatment was started in patients in the levadopa "on" state, the median change from historical expectation values is about -2.9 points. Getting close to the MCID but not there yet. Needs more time, more N, a placebo group - i.e. Phase 2 strongly justified. I am very impressed by how transparent Gain is with the data, FWIW.

jadezsherz

T yU⁵!<6Q2À R ra àtþ4 story r6$#|●●●5<|○○☆○☆○○☆☆<●|<□¤●5t4#59B5AB5A-3071-4D68-A39B-76DB74E88B9B&PD_RD_I 4 W AW 335té s==⁵==r dd⁴ex

Capable-Display-7907

Yes. Right now for colorectal cancer, starting another metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (and have Expanded Access for TNBC patients now). The colorectal cancer trial should be reporting whether the drug has elevated PD-L1 expression by mid to late February; that's the sign that previously untreatable cancers can now be treated with checkpoint inhibitors like Keytruda. (In the earlier small trial, 88% of the patients had elevated PD-L1 after being treated with Leronlimab. Every one of the patients that then got a checkpoint inhibitor is now alive, five years later. I.e., there is a good statistical likelihood that nearly 90 percent of patients who have what has been considered unsalvageable solid-tumor cancers can be saved.)

wiisports101

If Canadian side keeps getting contracts, total will continue to expand but I don’t see savanna becoming as big as PD or ensign

Correct_Proposal_409

Phase 1 trials are to make sure that a drug is safe and shows target engagement. Phase 2 trials test efficacy in a controlled setting, and when phase 2 trials fail, it is usually because: * there is insufficient CNS exposure * the target turns out not to be central to the actual disease biology, * they don’t have the right patients. The drug may work for a particular subset of patients, but the trial has been diluted by too many patients who have a different disease biology. Parkinson’s Disease is often called Parkinson’s Disease**s** because there are multiple different points of initial failure which ultimately turns into Parkinson’s. Different genetic mutations, and some might start with lysosomal dysfunction, while others might start with mitochondrial dysfunction. Or maybe neuroinflammation. This is still being researched. * they are measuring the wrong endpoints, * they don’t have the timing right (i.e., trial not long enough to show efficacy, or the initial benefits don’t sustain for the length of the trial). * the biomarkers move, but they don’t translate to clinical benefits Gain’s 1b trial, along with the extension, gives them a lot of valuable information which goes a long way towards derisking the phase 2. Many phase 1 trials do not go nearly as far as Gain went since the 1b measured many biomarkers, along with clinical symptoms. This is unusual. The first major hurdle towards proving efficacy was reducing GluSph, since it is both a direct measure of lysosomal dysfunction and also a driver of further dysfunction and cellular stress. By reducing it in such a short time period (90 days) means not only that there was sufficient CNS exposure. It also strongly suggests that the lysosme has regained lost functionality and that the cellular stress burden has been reduced. And based on what we know about Gaucher’s disease, this GluSph reduction is a central marker for disease control, and the parallel lysosomal recovery is the key driver for disease-modification. So the most important biomarker for efficacy is already there. And the UPDRS score improvements that they’ve already released suddenly look more credible. We should know more about further scores and biomarkers shortly, but it follows that if GluSph was reduced so thoroughly in such a short time, other important biomarkers which take longer to affect should show signs of improvement even by 90 days, and if there is broad biomarker improvement, this reliably predicts clinical improvements since they are so well-correlated. The other big advantage of the data they know have is that they can use that to inform the phase 2 set-up. They’ve already narrowed the focus for their phase 2, tightening inclusionary and exclusionary criteria for enrolling patients, and they can further adjust as data comes in from the extension. Same with outcome measures. [Here is their current phase 2 registration](https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07280299?tab=table) (which can be updated). One inclusionary criteria that stands out is “Positive SAA in CSF at Baseline” and another exclusionary criteria is “PD-associated LRRK2 pathogenic variant or other PD-associated genetic mutations other than GBA1.”  They now know that GT-02287 is more likely to move the needle from a biomarker perspective by screening this way, so this increases the likelihood of success. So to answer your question, based on what we now know, I think the chances for success in phase 2 are high. And if we get more biomarkers (like Complex I, Miro1, aggregated a-Syn, NFL) that are beginning to show improvements, and if the UPDRS scores that are not worsening-- and I think Gain will show this data between the KOL and the AD/PD conference in March-- then I think the chances for phase 2 success will be extremely high.

Correct_Proposal_409

Yes. I'm not saying that there are no more risks to market. There are many risks from the beginning of a drug's development all the way through until approval by FDA. But GT-02287 has cleared the most significant of the risks. They first did extensive pre-clinical studies that showed that the drug *should* work in humans. They basically showed that GT-02287 reversed Parkinon's in animals. Then they passed a significant test in the phase 1a with healthy volunteers showing that the drug was safe, crossed the blood brain barrier, and achieved its target (Gcase) as predicted by the pre-clinical models. Many drugs fail in one or more of these steps. Most recently, in the phase 1b, safety was further established, and it took a big step towards showing efficacy by reducing GluSph by 75-95%, which had never been done in Parkinson's patients. The improvements in the UPDRS motor scores that showed in October suddenly look like they weren't just random increases. This reduction in GluSph also makes it likely that further downstream, slower-moving biomarkers should also show improvement,,, and clinical symptoms as well. So through the lens of likelihood of a successful phase 2 study, and also through the lens of large pharamas looking to partner, GT-02287 has been derisked to where the answer is "yes". I also think that the drug is even further derisked if you narrow the patient target to GBA1 Parkinson's (\~10% of Parkinson's cases), which is originally what they were targeting-- dysfunctional Gcase caused by a genetic mutation. They've since realized that improving functional Gcase is also important in idiopathic cases as well, which represent the vast majority of PD cases. This is why I think the asymmetry is so rare here. The risk is now low for failure, especially in GBA1 cases, but the upside is enormous.

microcapreturns

They have funding through 2026. Warrants are what has been holding them back and they at least bring in cash. I see a deal way before any dilution and AD/PD conference coming in March makes me think they are selling it all.

Correct_Proposal_409

There is a [KOL event](https://gaintherapeutics.com/newsroom/press-releases/press-releases-2025/gain-therapeutics-to-host-virtual-kol-event-on-gt-02287-for-parkinsons-disease-2/) on January 6th where they will be presenting more data, but more importantly will have two of the top experts in the world to weigh in o on the results, especially the significance of the GluSph reduction, which has never been achieved in Parkinson's, and which in Gaucher's disease (as I mentioned above) is life-changing. Beyond the KOL event, they'll be at two conferences, including the JP Morgan conference, which is where a lot of deals get done. They'll likely partner or get acquired before phase 2. IND filing/acceptance, and the AD/PD conference in March where they'll have more data from the extension study. And more UPDRS data along the way-- this tracks any motor improvements (as seen in the interim data in October). This will also likely me discussed at the [KOL event](https://gaintherapeutics.com/newsroom/press-releases/press-releases-2025/gain-therapeutics-to-host-virtual-kol-event-on-gt-02287-for-parkinsons-disease-2/).

MediumSinger8088

Very similar situation here. There may be some leaks in Jan-Feb about Phase 2 studies, and the March AD/PD event likely will include new data; so any drop in share price during January should be more muted than the one we saw a couple weeks ago. I generally sell if there is a big pop into over-bought territory too soon. Otherwise I try to ride it out. Or sell if something convinces me that my thesis was wrong or got broken.

stayfun

PD?

Melonskal

How is it a PD? They have a revolutionary low cost launch system for small satelites in a era where the space industry is seeing more and more investment

microcapreturns

Great info. We should get the data we expected in Q4 and then extended data at AD/PD. Gain Therapeutics(GANX): Final countdown to Phase 1b data at January 6th KOL Event https://gaintherapeutics.wordpress.com/2025/12/20/gain-therapeuticsganx-final-countdown-to-phase-1b-data-at-january-6th-kol-event/ 

MediumSinger8088

Deep dive- Peter Landsbury, the KOL advising Gain, was the CSO of Lysosomal Therapeutics around 2018. That company had a compound LTI-291 that allosterically activates GCase, theoretically similar (but different from) GT-02287 which chaperones folding of the enzyme. Lysosomal and LTI-291 got acquired by BIAL, which is sponsoring a phase 2 trial of the drug now called BIA 28-6156 (pariceract) called the ACTIVATE study in PD. Last patient due to visit clinic in April 2026 and topline data expected Q2. Published data that LTI-291 (28 days, 40 patients) did not change GluCer in CSF or plasma but paradoxically increased the analyte in peripheral monocytes. No effect on MDS-UPDRS in this study. Take aways: IMO BIA 28-6156 is the closest competitor to GT-02287 but there are key differences and results from ACTIVATE may affect Gain price in ways that are illogical due to Mr. Market confusing the MOAs. Also GT-02287 seems to have done something unique in decreasing CSF GluSph. Note there is no data arguing glycosylsphingosine is a biomarker for PD progression but is a marker of target engagement which WILL bring some big pharma players into a conversation at least. There is some evidence that PD patients with elevated GluCer / SM are more prone to cognitive decline over 3 years, which indirectly speaks to cholinergic pathways involved in AD (there's that AD connection). It will take a long time to see this all play out. Years. Invest accordingly. And circling back: Listen to what Landsbury says in the KOL talk. He's probably the most informed guy in the world about this topic.

-_-Ebenezer-_-

Stumbled on this company while looking up pgm mining companies. If the ground there holds as much PT and PD they say, along with the nickel, we'll be sitting very nice. I think it's a safe bet that eventually we'll see a return even if ground only holds half of what they say.