Stem Cell Clinic

Cellstory Liquid Microneedling Treatment Review – Coveteur

For many of us, the thought of needles jabbing into our bodylet alone our facecan make even the bravest of us wince from the mere thought, making many viable aesthetic treatments out of the question. This is not unusualneedle phobia or trypanophobia, if you want to get fancy, is super prevalent, affecting up to 30% of adults. While I dont have a debilitating fear of needles, I love stumbling upon treatments that all of us, if not most, can experience without having, you know, a panic attack. Case in point: liquid microneedling. Dont let the name fool youthere are zero needles involved, but it offers similar benefits that one sees from needle-based treatments.

I happened upon Cellstory during my beauty travels, and I was fascinated by this non-invasive treatment (with little to no downtime) that boasts similar results to a non-ablative laser treatment. Cellstory, the professional treatment in question from Beyond Miracles, is patented with microspears containing 50,000 microneedles derived from freshwater-grown sponges that are applied to the skin (by a professional) through an 8-step facial treatment. ...[S]tep 5 contains the patented Microspear technology, which can be described as liquid microneedles. With the application of medium pressure, the Microspear[s] are delivered into the lower epidermis of the skin, creating tiny microchannels, which allows for better ingredient penetration, explains Dr. Dendy Engelman, MD, FACMA, FAAD, a board-certified cosmetic dermatologist and Mohs surgeon at Shafer Clinic in New York City. In other words, these microspears are small enough to penetrate the skin and work their magic.

Cellstory eliminates the pain, bleeding, swelling and irritation often associated with microneedling. Cellstory helps minimize the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles (specifically around the mouth, eyes, and forehead), acne, pigmentation, and uneven texture. It gives an overall healthy, supple, [and] bouncy glow, adds Dr. Engelman.

I was excited for the opportunity to try Cellstory, especially after waiting some time to schedule it, as I had to make sure that it did not interfere with any treatments or injectables I had previously scheduled. You should avoid Botox and fillers for 14 days before the treatment, and avoid lasers, chemical peels, microneedling and mesotherapy for seven days before, says Dr. Engelman. When the time came, I visited esthetician and founder Taylor Worden at her eponymous skincare oasiswhich I can confirm isin SoHo, New York City, for my Cellstory treatment.

Like any relaxing facial treatment I have gone for, I slipped into something a little more comfortable, wrapped my hair into a top bun, and laid on the esthetician bed. The start of the 8-step treatment was extremely relaxing. First, she applied an amino acid-infused cleanser; second, she swiped a cotton round drenched with a mixture of ginkgo biloba and niacinamide across my face; third, Worden applied an Awake Essense with a brush and let sit on my face for a few minutes; and fourth, she applied an activator ampoule packed with stem cell extract and three growth factors with a brush to my face.

Before I describe step five, the bread and butter of the whole treatment, I want to stress how relaxed and unready I was for what was to come. Worden applied the actual liquid microneedle creampacked with those 50,000 microscopic microneedles (or microspears), yellow calming complex, and growth factors topically through a syringe. She placed small dot-like shapes all over my face.

During step five of the treatment.

My skin immediately following the last step of the treatment.

Then, I vaguely remember her asking me if I was ready. Quickly and in precise circular motions, she massaged it into my skin, and it felt like she was shaving my skin down using sandpaper. The microspears are meant to have a prickly, tingly, and warming effect, but my skin screamed. This continued for several minutes until the cream was completely absorbed into my skin. Though I was very uncomfortable, I knew the cream was working its magic.

The following morning, when I finally touched my face to wash it, I felt the liquid microneedles. It was a sensation I had never experienced before. It almost felt like little pieces of glass lodged into my skin. While this sounds dramatic, its the best way I can describe it; however, it was not painful -just weird. This sensation lasted three days and decreased in intensity with each passing day.

You're advised to cleanse your face lightly after the treatment or until the sensation disappears completely. Following the treatment, for 72 hours, you should avoid retinol, exfoliants (physical or chemical), face oils or oil-based products, heavy sweating (i.e., saunas, heavy exercise), and sun exposure. Additionally, for one week after the treatment, you should avoid chemical peels or lasers, says Dr. Engelman.

My face immediately following the treatment.

My skin the morning after the treatment.

Cellstory is not a one-and-done treatment. We recommend that you initially have four treatments, one week apart," says Dr. Engleman. "After that, we suggest one time per month for maintenance. However, you can see results after just one treatment." There are also two at-home versions of Cellstory, each packed with 10,000 microneedles, compared to the 50,000 in the professional version. The at-home is a great alternative if you dont have access to a provider or want to maintain your treatment results from home.

Id be lying to you if I said I didnt look like a tomato after the treatment. I became the living, breathing version of #tomatogirlsummer. Despite that, my skin looked, in the best way I can describe it, WOW. It was the cleanest and smoothest it has ever looked after a treatment. It was something beyond a miracle (Im sorry - I couldnt resist the pun). In the hours following the treatment, the redness faded. The next morning, my skin looked healthy, glowy, and there wasn't a pore in sight. I was stunned by how a facial gave me better resultsalmost immediatelythan any laser treatment I had ever had.

In the days following the treatment, my skin looked plump and hydrated. Though my skin looked like the perfect canvas for makeup, I opted to go sans cosmetics and take full advantage of my perfect-looking skin.

If youre pregnant or breastfeeding or have any open wounds on your face, you should avoid the treatment. The only skin type that should completely avoid Cellstory altogether, says Dr. Engelman, is someone with severe melasma.

Just an FYI, in case you have a nut allergy: There is a small percentage of macadamia seed oil in step five. The allergy risk is very low, but we recommend spot testing if you have a severe nut allergy, says Dr. Engelman.

Depending on who you see and where you are, the cost of Cellstory can range from $350 to $500. (You can find a full list of providers, here.)

I cannot recommend this treatment enough. It is safe for almost everyone, and the results speak for themselves. Having gone through numerous sessions of both microneedling and radio frequency microneedling, and experiencing post-treatment swelling, redness, and blood, there is absolutely no downside to this treatment. And a reminderzero needles. Just some manageable discomfort. Lets just say Im ready to book my next appointment now.

Go here to read the rest:
Cellstory Liquid Microneedling Treatment Review - Coveteur

Selecting and Sequencing Ruxolitinib, Other Treatments in Chronic … – Cancer Network

Nelson J. Chao, MD, MBA, and his colleagues discussed the use of ruxolitinib as treatment for patients with graft-vs-host disease.

At an Around the Practice program hosted by CancerNetwork,a panel of experts discussed symptom assessment and the selection of treatment options in patients with chronic graft-vs-host disease (GVHD). They reviewed these topics in the context of a clinical scenario involving a patient with acute GVHD. The panel was led by Nelson J. Chao, MD, MBA, a cellular therapy specialist and stem cell transplant specialist at the Duke Adult Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinic in Durham, North Carolina.

The panelists included Hana Safah, MD, a professor of clinical medicine in the Section of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation Program and the Leukemia and Lymphoma Programs at Tulane University School of Medicine in New Orleans, Louisiana; Erin Kopp, NP, the directorof advanced practice and a nurse practitioner at City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, California; and Catherine J. Lee, MD, MS, an associate professor in the Clinical Research Division at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, Washington.

Chao: Ruxolitinib [Jakafi] is approved as a second-line treatment for GVHD based on the phase 3 REACH3 study [NCT03112603].1,2 If treatment with ruxolitinib fails, what would you do?

Safah: There are options that may also help patients if ruxolitinib fails. Some of my colleagues use ibrutinib [Imbruvica]. Im not as much of a fan of ibrutinib, though it is an option. It has been studied in patients, and it did show benefits, especially if a patient has only skin GVHD. ROCK2 inhibitors are a good third-line option in patients with disease progression following JAK inhibitors. I also continue extracorporeal photopheresis [ECP] in these patients, especially those with skin GVHD.

Kopp: If a patient is starting to show that they may become steroid refractory or dependent, we work them up for clinical trials before we get [to the treatment phase], because clinical trials are an important option to observe. For centers outside of that space, the referral process should start early because clinical trials require screening, slots, and time. We start that concurrently. If we are in a situation where ruxolitinib or any other second-line options are not panning out, we already have the clinical trial potentially available.

Chao: Does anybody have a favorite treatment option?

Lee: Ill still use rituximab [Rituxan] or low-dose weekly methotrexate to see [whether] it helps. Ive seen rituximab work in the very refractory setting, particularly for oral chronic GVHD. I have not had much luck with very advanced ocular or sclerotic chronic GVHD, although there are reports of rituximab having activity in the setting.

Safah: Rituximab can be helpful. I sometimes add rituximab early in patients with severe skin GVHD. Thats one option. Targeting the plasma cells in patients with progression is another. Ive used proteasome inhibitors with minor success. They do not work by themselves, but they can add to the treatments available, whether its rituximab, [ECP], or antithymocyte globulin. However, there is nothing that will always work. Clinical trials are always important to have. [However], when they fail, it becomes a question of: What is available for us, and what can the patient receive? [At this point], it depends on the clinical status, the comorbidities, and the toxicities from the options available.

Chao: Theres the phase 2 AGAVE-201 trial [NCT04710576] with axatilimab that is targeting the monocytes, which is potentially another mechanism.3

Chao: What do you think about this situation?

Lee: I feel horrible for the patient. This is an unfortunate situation, and it is an example of when patients are released back to their homes, they may not be under close supervision before returning with these severe symptoms. The case study brings up a couple questions. When the patient developed acute GVHD, it was treated successfully with corticosteroids. The first questions that come up in my mind are: What was going on with the tacrolimus and sirolimus [Rapamune] at this time? Did the patient just stop taking her medications, or had she been weaned off? Regardless, she does present around month 6 with these GI symptoms, elevated liver function tests, and signs of chronic GVHD as shes reporting tightness around the mouth. This needs to be treated urgently.

At this point, I would have admitted the patient into the hospital and started high-dose steroids, as what was done here. I would have started at 1 mg/kg per day, thinking that this might be acute or chronic GVHD and knowing that some other treatment options take a little longer to take effect. I would have started corticosteroid equivalent at 2 mg/kg per day and watched her carefully. If she had not responded by day 5, I would have added a second-line agent and started tapering off the corticosteroids. I dont find a reason here to increase the steroids to 2 mg/kg after someone doesnt respond to 1.5 mg/kg. The patient was left too long on this 1.5-mg/kg per day dose.

Safah: I agree. I would have been giving the higher dose earlier compared with what was done here. I evaluate these patients very early on. If there is no evidence of response by day 5, or if theyre progressing by day 5 and there is no evidence of response by day 7, I elect to go to a second-line treatment rather than increasing the dose of steroids as such.

Kopp: This is an excellent representation of the type of patients we receive and the questions that often come with them. If theyre not continuing to receive care in the institution in which they underwent a transplant and there are changes to their immunosuppressive regimens, steroids, or presentation of symptoms, we dont always get the full report of what happened. So, patients do show up on my doorstep presenting like this. One thing we need to focus on is how often were monitoring our patients at critical milestones. When you initiate steroids, the concept is that the patient needs to be closely followed for 3,5, or 7 days because we can identifysometimes as early as 3 dayswhether a patient is responding to the corticosteroid dose.

Im hoping this illustrates the challenges that many physicians and other health care professionals have when working with a patient like this. The onus is on everyone who interacts with the patients to say when theres a new symptom and where theres a change in something that we do. Additionally, the patient sometimes must advocate for themselves and say, How can I see you in another week? Or call their transplant physician or the long-term care clinic so were aware of it sooner rather than later.

Organ Involvement With Ruxolitinib and Using Steroids

Chao: Given our earlier discussion, this patients condition is not getting better, and ruxolitinib is the drug we would probably all pick to treat her.

Safah: I agree with you. Ruxolitinib is approved as a second-line therapy in patients who are refractory to steroids. This patient would be a very appropriate candidate for such a treatment.

Chao: Does it matter which organ is involved in terms of outcomes?

Safah: When you look at ruxolitinib in the REACH3 trial, the benefit was seen across all organs. We might combine it with other drugs. We can add rituximab, but we need to be careful [because] it may cause immunosuppression. We need to be careful of the risk of infection, especially when were adding JAK inhibitors. The risk of whether there may be viral reactivation or other infections should be considered when combining ruxolitinib with other immunosuppressants. I prefer to take it slowly. Again, I know benefits have been seen across all organs on the trial.

Lee: We know that in the REACH3 trial for acute GVHD, the responses and the duration of response [DOR] were not so great among those who had severe gastrointestinal involvement. This leads to the unmet need that we are still facing, which is understanding what therapy may fit best for a particular organ. This is an area of research that will help guide treatment for different manifestations of GVHD if we can identify and develop biomarkers.

Chao: Do you taper patients off steroids if you have ruxolitinib as an option? What would you do if someone is refractory?

Lee: We would taper off the steroids in someone who is refractory. This is also very dependent on the institution. Fred [Hutchinson Cancer Center] has a long history of using steroids and being a little slower on the taper, but other institutions may feel comfortable in terms of rapidly tapering off the steroids.

Kopp: My experience is that we are less excited about tapering the steroids even when it seems that patients are refractory. Theres the fear that if you see some effect and then take the steroids away, the disease will flare even more. Theres a reliance on keeping those steroids as you add ruxolitinib or any other agent on top of them. With any oral agent like ruxolitinib, there has been hesitancy to use it with patients who have GI presentations. With the REACH studies, there doesnt seem to be an issue with absorption and utilization unless we know theres a significant issue with a patients absorption. However, there is efficacy to a certain level. Thats where I think we start combining steroids with ruxolitinib, which may give the effect but not the DOR. We may then add another agent if were talking about different organs.

What I have noticed in the [past] 5 years is that the addition of agents has become more intentional. People are looking at the etiology, the drugs mechanism of action, the affected organs, and the research involved. Its a complex process. Before, I would describe practice as a dartboard where you just throw everything at it and see what sticks. Now, there are a lot of ingredients, and were all more experienced with how it will affect the overall outcome.

Chao: Are there any drugs coming down the pipeline that youre excited about?

Lee: The field is exciting to look forward to when it comes to more combinational therapies, as we are seeing that combinations of drugs with different mechanisms of action may help control GVHD and perhaps improve it by targeting different biological pathways. I have used a combination of ruxolitinib and belumosudil [Rezurock], and I know some centers have initiated clinical trials of using these 2 drugs in refractory chronic GVHD.

Safah: In practice, many of us have used ruxolitinib and [belumosudil] together. Some of us have used it in patients who are refractory to one or the other. Ive also used them in patients who have severe chronic GVHD and were not going to be maintained on only 1 drug. Im asking my colleagues now, and Ive requested that we start publishing the data on patients who have received the combination and have done well so that our other colleagues can do the same. Belumosudils safety profile is not bad. On the other hand, the JAK inhibitors do very well, and they have a nice mechanism for controlling inflammation and potentially fibrosis. Adding them together can benefit patients. We can do it in the refractory setting. Maybe we should start looking at earlier lines, and maybe we can skip steroids. Other than that, I think clinical trials will be best, but we dont have many other options at this point.

Kopp: For GVHD, the seeds are planted for early settings in transplant. For posttransplant regimens that include cyclophosphamide, there is a lot of focus on identifying [whether] a patient has acute GVHD or multiple risk factors. Theres been a foundation set with biomarkers. What we do with them next may involve the concept of precision medicine in acute and chronic GVHD to meet the needs of the patient systemically.

Ive also seen a growth in supportive therapy. For the patient, the fact that we can manage these symptoms while were treating the underlying process is probably the biggest development that patients are excited about. If patients have skin that feels like its peeling off and you have 5 more agents now that may treat them topically, thats a huge win as a patient. The same thing applies to oral sloughing. The inability to brush your teeth with toothpaste is something that patients bring to us, as well as needing to wear sunglasses outside at night because their eyes are so dry. The growth in supportive therapy regimens is also something that needs more research because its important to the patients alongside treating the underlying cause.

Read the rest here:
Selecting and Sequencing Ruxolitinib, Other Treatments in Chronic ... - Cancer Network

Molecule discovered that grows bigger and stronger muscles – Earth.com

Over the years, scientists have embarked on anti-aging research to provide drugs and treatments that can slow or reverse aging and treat age-related diseases.Now, scientists at Stanford University have discovered an aging-related protein that can stimulate growth of stronger and larger muscles.

The 15-PGDH protein is the latest discovery by the Stanford scientists, who are working on possible treatments for diminished strength and paralysis due to trauma, heritable neuromuscular diseases, or aging.

Using a mouse model, the researchers injected a 15-PGDH-blocking molecule in older mice. They followed the simulated injuries to the sciatic nerves of the injected mice with treatments.

This led to more prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) production, followed by the growth of stronger and larger muscle fibers in the mice.

By inhibiting the 15-PGDH, also known as gerozyme, the researchers significantly improved the endurance and strength of the muscles grown in the lab.

The researchers found that 15-prostaglandin dehydrogenase (15-PGDH), which accumulates with age and promotes muscle atrophy, markedly increased in denervated mouse myofibers and aggregated in target fibers, hallmarks of chronic nerve damage in human myogenic neuropathies, noted Melissa L. Norton, the editor of the published study.

Treating older mice with chronic muscle denervation with the 15-PGDH inhibitor enhanced the motor neurons and rejuvenated the neuromuscular junctions and function.

This could potentially help older adults who experience increasingly weaker muscles with age and people dealing with muscle-wasting diseases like amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).

Our data suggests that inhibition of 15-PGDH may constitute a therapeutic strategy to physiologically boost prostaglandin E2, restore neuromuscular connectivity, and promote recovery of strength after acute or chronic denervation due to injury, disease or aging, the researchers noted in their report.

Although this latest study expands on existing evidence of protein regulating muscle function during aging in mice, the researchers have described it as unique.

Study co-author Dr. Helen Blau is the director of the Baxter Laboratory for Stem Cell Biology at Stanford.

This is the first time a drug treatment has been shown to affect both muscle fibers and the motor neurons that stimulate them to contract, speeding up healing and restoring strength and muscle mass, said Dr. Blau.

The Stanford scientists want to build on their findings to see if this mechanism can be transitioned into real-life treatments and therapy.

Our next steps will be to examine whether blocking 15-PGDH function in people with conditions like spinal muscular atrophy, in combination with gene therapy or other treatments, can increase lost muscle strength, said Dr. Blau.

We are also looking at ALS to see if something like this might help these patients. Its really exciting that we are able to affect both muscle function and motor neuron growth.

Weak muscle strength is a huge problem among elders. According to a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), five percent of adults aged 60 and over have weak muscle strength, while 13 percent have intermediate muscle strength.

But muscle weakness isnt just a concern for older people. It starts creeping in as early as your 50s and comes with a great economic cost. Weaker muscles reduce the ability to move around, work, and care for oneself. This condition also increases the risk of injuries.

The good news is that science is making promising strides toward addressing this widespread problem. With continued research and advancement, a lasting solution for muscle weakness may be on the horizon.

The study can be found in the journal Science Translational Medicine.

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates.

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Read the original post:
Molecule discovered that grows bigger and stronger muscles - Earth.com

Knight Therapeutics Announces CMED Price Approval of Minjuvi … – GlobeNewswire

MONTREAL, Oct. 16, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Knight Therapeutics Inc., (TSX: GUD) ("Knight") a pan-American (ex-USA) specialty pharmaceutical company, announced today that its Brazilian affiliate, United Medical Ltd., has received pricing approval for Minjuvi (tafasitamab) from the Drugs Market Regulation Chamber (CMED). As a result, Knight expects to launch Minjuvi in Brazil in the second quarter of 2024.

In July 2023, ANVISA (Agncia Nacional de Vigilncia Sanitria) granted Market Authorization under their rare disease designation according to Resolution RDC 205/2017 for Minjuvi in combination with lenalidomide followed by Minjuvi monotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), including DLBCL arising from low grade lymphoma, and who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT).

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is a type of aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, with suboptimal efficacy results with standard available therapies for patients who have failed to previous treatments and are not candidates for transplant.

Considering the nature of the disease and the current unmet medical need, there is still space to improve the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in Brazil, said Dr. Danielle Leo, Head of the Hematology Department from Beneficncia Portuguesa Hospital in So Paulo. Minjuvi is an innovative therapy with proven efficacy and safety profile. There is no other effective alternative approved in the country in the second line of treatment for relapsed or refractory DLBCL.

The approval is based on the data from L-MIND, an open label, multicenter, single arm Phase 2 study, that evaluated Minjuvi in combination with lenalidomide for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL. The study primary analysis results showed an objective response rate (ORR, primary endpoint) of 60%, including a complete response rate (CR) of 43% and a disease control rate (DCR) of 75%.

Were excited to continue to advance the approval of Minjuvi in Brazil, a new treatment option for a current unmet need. We look forward to launching Minjuvi in Brazil and obtaining approval in other key markets in Latin America, said Samira Sakhia, Knight Therapeutics President and CEO.

In September 2021, Knight entered into a supply and distribution agreement with Incyte (NASDAQ: INCY), for the exclusive rights to distribute pemigatinib (Pemazyre) as well as tafasitamab (sold as Monjuvi in the United States and Minjuvi in Europe) in Latin America.

With the price approval Minjuvi will be available for commercialization in the Brazilian market. Knights team is working diligently with physicians, key institutions and payors to ensure patients have access to Minjuvi, said Cristiane Coelho, Knight Therapeutics Brazil General Manager.

About Minjuvi (tafasitamab)

Minjuvi (tafasitamab) is a humanized Fc-modified cytolytic CD19 targeting immunotherapy. In 2010, MorphoSys licensed exclusive worldwide rights to develop and commercialize tafasitamab from Xencor, Inc. Tafasitamab incorporates an XmAbengineered Fc domain, which mediates B-cell lysis through apoptosis and immune effector mechanism including Antibody-Dependent Cell-Mediated Cytotoxicity (ADCC) and Antibody-Dependent Cellular Phagocytosis (ADCP).

In the United States, Monjuvi(tafasitamab-cxix) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in combination with lenalidomide for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL not otherwise specified, including DLBCL arising from low grade lymphoma, and who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on overall response rate. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial(s). Please see the U.S. full Prescribing Information for Monjuvi for important safety information.

In Europe, Minjuvi(tafasitamab) received conditional approval, in combination with lenalidomide, followed by Minjuvi monotherapy, for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT).

Tafasitamab is being clinically investigated as a therapeutic option in B-cell malignancies in several ongoing combination trials. Its safety and efficacy for these investigational uses have not been established in pivotal trials.

Minjuviand Monjuviare registered trademarks of MorphoSys AG. Tafasitamab is co-marketed by Incyte and MorphoSys under the brand name Monjuviin the U.S., and marketed by Incyte under the brand name Minjuviin Region Europe, the United Kingdom and Canada. As part of its agreement with MorphoSys, Incyte received exclusive commercialization rights for tafasitamab outside the United States.

XmAbis a registered trademark of Xencor, Inc.

About Pemigatinib (Pemazyre)

Pemigatinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated inthe United Statesfor the treatment of adults with previously treated, unresectable locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with a fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) fusion or other rearrangement as detected by an FDA-approved test. This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on overall response rate and duration of response. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial(s).

The FDA approval in the USA is based on a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, multicohort, phase 2 study (FIGHT-202), that evaluated the safety and antitumor activity of pemigatinib in patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with and without FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements, in patients aged 18 years or older with disease progression following at least one previous treatment.

The overall response rate was 36%, with 2.8% of patients having a complete response and 34% having a partial response. Median duration of response was 9.1 months. The most common adverse reactions occurring in 20% or more of patients who received pemigatinib are hyperphosphatemia, alopecia, diarrhea, fatigue, dysgeusia, nausea and stomatitis.

Pemigatinib is also the first targeted treatment approved for use inthe United Statesfor treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms (MLNs) with FGFR1 rearrangement.

InJapan, pemigatinib is approved for the treatment of patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer (BTC) with a fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) fusion gene, worsening after cancer chemotherapy.

InEurope, pemigatinib is approved for the treatment of adults with locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with a fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) fusion or rearrangement that have progressed after at least one prior line of systemic therapy.

Pemazyre is marketed byIncyteinthe United States,EuropeandJapan.

Pemazyre is a trademark ofIncyte Corporation.

About Knight Therapeutics Inc.

Knight Therapeutics Inc., headquartered in Montreal, Canada, is a specialty pharmaceutical company focused on acquiring or in-licensing and commercializing pharmaceutical products for Canada and Latin America. Knight's Latin American subsidiaries operate under United Medical, Biotoscana Farma and Laboratorio LKM. Knight Therapeutics Inc.'s shares trade on TSX under the symbol GUD. For more information about Knight Therapeutics Inc., please visit the company's web site at http://www.knighttx.com or http://www.sedar.com.

Forward-Looking Statement

This document contains forward-looking statements for Knight Therapeutics Inc. and its subsidiaries. These forward-looking statements, by their nature, necessarily involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. Knight Therapeutics Inc. considers the assumptions on which these forward-looking statements are based to be reasonable at the time they were prepared but cautions the reader that these assumptions regarding future events, many of which are beyond the control of Knight Therapeutics Inc. and its subsidiaries, may ultimately prove to be incorrect. Factors and risks, which could cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations are discussed in Knight Therapeutics Inc.'s Annual Report and in Knight Therapeutics Inc.'s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2022 as filed on http://www.sedar.com. Knight Therapeutics Inc. disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether because of new information or future events, except as required by law.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

Continue reading here:
Knight Therapeutics Announces CMED Price Approval of Minjuvi ... - GlobeNewswire