Connect with us
MARE BALTICUM Gaming & TECH Summit 2024

Fintech

Offering New Hope for a Rare Form of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: A Discussion with Dr. Ellen Kim on HyBryte(TM) from Soligenix

Published

on

New York, New York–(Newsfile Corp. – July 6, 2021) – PCG Digital — A rare form of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) has no current FDA-approved first-line therapies. There are roughly 3,000 new CTCL cases in the United States each year, with more than 20,000 patients living with CTCL.

Small cap biotech Soligenix (NASDAQ: SNGX) is developing and moving toward potential commercialization of HyBryte™ (SGX301 or synthetic hypericin) as a novel first in class photodynamic therapy utilizing safe visible light for the treatment of early stage CTCL.

Recently Dr. Ellen Kim, Medical Director of the Dermatology Clinic for the Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Professor of Dermatology at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, and the Lead Principal Investigator for Soligenix’s positive Phase 3 FLASH (Fluorescent Light Activated Synthetic Hypericin) study in CTCL, recently presented key details of HyBryte’s™ efficacy and safety profile at the United States Cutaneous Lymphoma Consortium (USCLC) Annual Meeting.

We caught up with Dr. Kim shortly after the meeting to discuss the HyBryte data and the current treatment landscape for CTCL.

  1. How does HyBryte™ stack up to other treatments that you’ve been using in your practice? If it gains FDA-approval, how will that affect your approach to treating Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma (CTCL)?
  1. HyBryte™ is as effective, and has better short term, and possibly long term, safety profile than current skin directed therapies. It is also effective for CTCL plaques which are traditionally more refractory to many skin directed treatments. Given this, it will be used both as first line therapy for my early stage patients and for patients who can’t continue other therapies due to side effects or loss of response.
  1. HyBryte™ uses visible light as opposed to ultraviolet (UV) light. Penn Medicine, as well as most centers treating this disease, is currently using UV treatments for CTCL. Is HyBryte™, in your opinion, a safer option?
  1. HyBryte™ has a definite advantage over phototherapy long term – it’s mechanism of action is distinct from ultraviolet phototherapy and is non-mutagenic so the risk of developing actinic skin damage and skin cancers is lower. Short term side effects were also less common and milder than what we see in traditional phototherapy.
  1. Dr. Kim, on the Penn Medicine website, it lists Photopheresis and T-Cell Lymphoma Phototherapy as two different treatments. Can you describe the difference between the two? Is one more effective than the other? Where would you classify HyBryte™?
  1. Phototherapy is a skin-directed treatment utilizing either ultraviolet A or B light and is used primarily in early stage CTCL.

Photopheresis is a systemic treatment where a patient’s peripheral white blood cells are treated ex vivo with UVA-based phototherapy in a machine and is indicated for primarily CTCL patients with blood involvement, most of whom have more advanced stage disease. Early stage CTCL patients without blood involvement are not typically treated with photopheresis at most centers.

Because they are used in different types of patients/stages of disease, and there are no randomized controlled trials that examined phototherapy vs photopheresis, one cannot compare the response rates between phototherapy and photopheresis to each other.

HyBryte™, a skin-directed therapy, is similar to phototherapy with a primary focus on treating early stage disease. Again, targeted as a potential first line therapy.

  1. Can you describe the process of Photopheresis and phototherapy from a patient’s perspective? How invasive is it for early stage patients? What can the patient expect as far as a timeline and level of discomfort? Does HyBryte™ provide a faster and more comfortable process?
  1. Traditional phototherapy and HyBryte™ have similar logistics from the patient perspective – they do require in office visits twice or three times weekly for a period of several months. Phototherapy treats the entire skin surface area exposed to the light, whereas HyBryte™ can be used for selective treatment if desired (though multiple lesions can be treated if desired as well). We don’t have direct trial data comparing phototherapy vs HyBryte™ regarding time to response. When I counsel patients starting traditional phototherapy, I counsel that initial response is seen at 4-6 weeks, but full response can take 4-12 months. We do know time to response is similar between HyBryte™ and topical bexarotene gel, topical nitrogen mustard gel, oral bexarotene in early stage disease; however, as I noted earlier, the safety profile of HyBryte™ compared to these other DNA-damaging therapies longer term is potentially much different given the mild side-effects we’ve seen in the Phase 3 FLASH study.

Photopheresis requires 2 outpatient treatments every 4 weeks, and a peripheral IV is placed each visit since the peripheral blood is removed from the patient temporarily during the treatment, so is considered a more invasive procedure. Time to response is slow – first response is seen at 3 months, full response takes 6-24 months. Again, the focus here is mostly later stage or for more advanced disease.

  1. Can you share any knowledge or experience you have with synthetic hypericin? Is it safe? Have you ever encountered any negative side effects from its use?
  1. After participating in the FLASH study as the overall study PI, I’ve been impressed with the efficacy and tolerability of HyBryte™ – any localized skin application side effects have been very mild and manageable compared to other current skin directed therapies.
  1. When will the public receive more details about the positive Phase 3 FLASH study and HyBryte™?
  1. This year, I’ve had the pleasure to present some of the high level positive results at three prestigious conferences in this disease space. The American Academy of Dermatology, the Society of Investigative Dermatology and the US Cutaneous Lymphoma Consortium; however, we currently anticipate having the full manuscript for the FLASH study (and HyBryte™) published in a peer reviewed medical journal and made available later this year.
  1. One final question, Dr. Kim. Can you definitively say that you will use HyBryte™ as a treatment option for CTCL in your practice, provided it gains FDA approval?
  1. Yes, most definitely. This will be a valuable, safer option for our patients who must utilize multiple different skin directed therapies to manage their chronic CTCL over many years and sometimes decades.

To learn more about Hybryte visit https://www.hybryte.com

Disclaimer

This communication was produced by PCG Digital LLC, an affiliate of PCG Advisory Inc., (together “PCG”). PCG is an integrated investor relations, communications and strategic advisory firm. The information contained on this is ‘Paid Advertising’ for purposes of Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (together with the rules and regulations there under, the “Securities Act”). PCG is compensated by respective clients for publicizing information relating to its client’s securities. For more information in terms of compensation received for services provided by PCG, see the pertinent advertising materials relating to the respective client. By accessing this Site and any pages thereof, you agree to be bound by the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

PCG is not a registered or licensed broker, dealer, broker-dealer, investment adviser nor investment manager, nor does PCG engage in any activities that would require such registrations. PCG does not provide investment advice, endorsement, analysis or recommendations with respect to any securities, and its services to or statements about its clients should never be construed as any endorsement of or opinion about any security of any client. No information contained in this communication constitutes an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a recommendation of any security or any other similar product or service regardless of whether such security, product, or service is referenced in this communication.

Our reports/releases are a commercial advertisement and are for general information purposes ONLY. We are engaged in the business of marketing and advertising companies for monetary compensation. We only publish favorable information because we are compensated to publish only favorable information.

The contributors may buy and sell securities before and after any particular article, report and publication. In no event shall “PCG” or affiliates be liable to any member, guest or third party for any damages of any kind arising out of the use of any content or other material published or made available by “PCG”, including, without limitation, any investment losses, lost profits, lost opportunity, special, incidental, indirect, consequential or punitive damages. Further, nothing in this communication is intended to provide tax, legal, or investment advice and nothing in this communication should be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any investment or security or to engage in any investment strategy or transaction. Investing in micro-cap and growth securities is highly speculative and carries an extremely high degree of risk. It is possible that an investor’s investment may be lost or impaired due to the speculative nature of the companies profiled. Never invest in any stock featured by “PCG” unless you can afford to lose your entire investment. We urge investors to conduct their own in-depth investigation of the Profiled Issuers with the assistance of their legal, tax and investment advisers. An investor’s review of the Information should include but not be limited to the Profiled Issuer’s financial condition, operations, management, products or services, trends in the industry and risks that may be material to the profiled Issuer’s business and other information he and his advisers deem material to an investment decision. We encourage our readers to invest carefully and read the investor information available at the web sites of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) at www.sec.gov and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) at www.finra.org.

For full disclaimers, including compensation received for professional services, please visit www.pcgadvisory.com/disclosures.

Contact: [email protected]

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/89471

Fintech

How to identify authenticity in crypto influencer channels

Published

on

 

Modern brands stake on influencer marketing, with 76% of users making a purchase after seeing a product on social media.The cryptocurrency industry is no exception to this trend. However, promoting crypto products through influencer marketing can be particularly challenging. Crypto influencers pose a significant risk to a brand’s reputation and ROI due to rampant scams. Approximately 80% of channels provide fake statistics, including followers counts and engagement metrics. Additionally, this niche is characterized by high CPMs, which can increase the risk of financial loss for brands.

In this article Nadia Bubennnikova, Head of agency Famesters, will explore the most important things to look for in crypto channels to find the perfect match for influencer marketing collaborations.

 

  1. Comments 

There are several levels related to this point.

 

LEVEL 1

Analyze approximately 10 of the channel’s latest videos, looking through the comments to ensure they are not purchased from dubious sources. For example, such comments as “Yes sir, great video!”; “Thanks!”; “Love you man!”; “Quality content”, and others most certainly are bot-generated and should be avoided.

Just to compare: 

LEVEL 2

Don’t rush to conclude that you’ve discovered the perfect crypto channel just because you’ve come across some logical comments that align with the video’s topic. This may seem controversial, but it’s important to dive deeper. When you encounter a channel with logical comments, ensure that they are unique and not duplicated under the description box. Some creators are smarter than just buying comments from the first link that Google shows you when you search “buy YouTube comments”. They generate topics, provide multiple examples, or upload lists of examples, all produced by AI. You can either manually review the comments or use a script to parse all the YouTube comments into an Excel file. Then, add a formula to highlight any duplicates.

LEVEL 3

It is also a must to check the names of the profiles that leave the comments: most of the bot-generated comments are easy to track: they will all have the usernames made of random symbols and numbers, random first and last name combinations, “Habibi”, etc. No profile pictures on all comments is also a red flag.

 

LEVEL 4

Another important factor to consider when assessing comment authenticity is the posting date. If all the comments were posted on the same day, it’s likely that the traffic was purchased.

 

2. Average views number per video

This is indeed one of the key metrics to consider when selecting an influencer for collaboration, regardless of the product type. What specific factors should we focus on?

First & foremost: the views dynamics on the channel. The most desirable type of YouTube channel in terms of views is one that maintains stable viewership across all of its videos. This stability serves as proof of an active and loyal audience genuinely interested in the creator’s content, unlike channels where views vary significantly from one video to another.

Many unauthentic crypto channels not only buy YouTube comments but also invest in increasing video views to create the impression of stability. So, what exactly should we look at in terms of views? Firstly, calculate the average number of views based on the ten latest videos. Then, compare this figure to the views of the most recent videos posted within the past week. If you notice that these new videos have nearly the same number of views as those posted a month or two ago, it’s a clear red flag. Typically, a YouTube channel experiences lower views on new videos, with the number increasing organically each day as the audience engages with the content. If you see a video posted just three days ago already garnering 30k views, matching the total views of older videos, it’s a sign of fraudulent traffic purchased to create the illusion of view stability.

 

3. Influencer’s channel statistics

The primary statistics of interest are region and demographic split, and sometimes the device types of the viewers.

LEVEL 1

When reviewing the shared statistics, the first step is to request a video screencast instead of a simple screenshot. This is because it takes more time to organically edit a video than a screenshot, making it harder to manipulate the statistics. If the creator refuses, step two (if only screenshots are provided) is to download them and check the file’s properties on your computer. Look for details such as whether it was created with Adobe Photoshop or the color profile, typically Adobe RGB, to determine if the screenshot has been edited.

LEVEL 2

After confirming the authenticity of the stats screenshot, it’s crucial to analyze the data. For instance, if you’re examining a channel conducted in Spanish with all videos filmed in the same language, it would raise concerns to find a significant audience from countries like India or Turkey. This discrepancy, where the audience doesn’t align with regions known for speaking the language, is a red flag.

If we’re considering an English-language crypto channel, it typically suggests an international audience, as English’s global use for quality educational content on niche topics like crypto. However, certain considerations apply. For instance, if an English-speaking channel shows a significant percentage of Polish viewers (15% to 30%) without any mention of the Polish language, it could indicate fake followers and views. However, if the channel’s creator is Polish, occasionally posts videos in Polish alongside English, and receives Polish comments, it’s important not to rush to conclusions.

Example of statistics

 

Wrapping up

These are the main factors to consider when selecting an influencer to promote your crypto product. Once you’ve launched the campaign, there are also some markers to show which creators did bring the authentic traffic and which used some tools to create the illusion of an active and engaged audience. While this may seem obvious, it’s still worth mentioning. After the video is posted, allow 5-7 days for it to accumulate a basic number of views, then check performance metrics such as views, clicks, click-through rate (CTR), signups, and conversion rate (CR) from clicks to signups.

If you overlooked some red flags when selecting crypto channels for your launch, you might find the following outcomes: channels with high views numbers and high CTRs, demonstrating the real interest of the audience, yet with remarkably low conversion rates. In the worst-case scenario, you might witness thousands of clicks resulting in zero to just a few signups. While this might suggest technical issues in other industries, in crypto campaigns it indicates that the creator engaged in the campaign not only bought fake views and comments but also link clicks. And this happens more often than you may realize.

Summing up, choosing the right crypto creator to promote your product is indeed a tricky job that requires a lot of resources to be put into the search process. 

Author Nadia Bubennikova, Head of agency  at Famesters

Author

Nadia Bubennikova, Head of agency at Famesters

Continue Reading

Fintech

Central banks and the FinTech sector unite to change global payments space

Published

on

central-banks-and-the-fintech-sector-unite-to-change-global-payments-space

 

The BIS, along with seven leading central banks and a cohort of private financial firms, has embarked on an ambitious venture known as Project Agorá.

Named after the Greek word for “marketplace,” this initiative stands at the forefront of exploring the potential of tokenisation to significantly enhance the operational efficiency of the monetary system worldwide.

Central to this pioneering project are the Bank of France (on behalf of the Eurosystem), the Bank of Japan, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Mexico, the Swiss National Bank, the Bank of England, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. These institutions have joined forces under the banner of Project Agorá, in partnership with an extensive assembly of private financial entities convened by the Institute of International Finance (IIF).

At the heart of Project Agorá is the pursuit of integrating tokenised commercial bank deposits with tokenised wholesale central bank money within a unified, public-private programmable financial platform. By harnessing the advanced capabilities of smart contracts and programmability, the project aspires to unlock new transactional possibilities that were previously infeasible or impractical, thereby fostering novel opportunities that could benefit businesses and consumers alike.

The collaborative effort seeks to address and surmount a variety of structural inefficiencies that currently plague cross-border payments. These challenges include disparate legal, regulatory, and technical standards; varying operating hours and time zones; and the heightened complexity associated with conducting financial integrity checks (such as anti-money laundering and customer verification procedures), which are often redundantly executed across multiple stages of a single transaction due to the involvement of several intermediaries.

As a beacon of experimental and exploratory projects, the BIS Innovation Hub is committed to delivering public goods to the global central banking community through initiatives like Project Agorá. In line with this mission, the BIS will soon issue a call for expressions of interest from private financial institutions eager to contribute to this ground-breaking project. The IIF will facilitate the involvement of private sector participants, extending an invitation to regulated financial institutions representing each of the seven aforementioned currencies to partake in this transformative endeavour.

Source: fintech.globa

The post Central banks and the FinTech sector unite to change global payments space appeared first on HIPTHER Alerts.

Continue Reading

Fintech

TD Bank inks multi-year strategic partnership with Google Cloud

Published

on

td-bank-inks-multi-year-strategic-partnership-with-google-cloud

 

TD Bank has inked a multi-year deal with Google Cloud as it looks to streamline the development and deployment of new products and services.

The deal will see the Canadian banking group integrate the vendor’s cloud services into a wider portion of its technology solutions portfolio, a move which TD expects will enable it “to respond quickly to changing customer expectations by rolling out new features, updates, or entirely new financial products at an accelerated pace”.

This marks an expansion of the already established relationship between TD Bank and Google Cloud after the group previously adopted the vendor’s Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) for TD Securities Automated Trading (TDSAT), the Chicago-based subsidiary of its investment banking unit, TD Securities.

TDSAT uses GKE for process automation and quantitative modelling across fixed income markets, resulting in the development of a “data-driven research platform” capable of processing large research workloads in trading.

Dan Bosman, SVP and CIO of TD Securities, claims the infrastructure has so far supported TDSAT with “compute-intensive quantitative analysis” while expanding the subsidiary’s “trading volumes and portfolio size”.

TD’s new partnership with Google Cloud will see the group attempt to replicate the same level of success across its entire portfolio.

Source: fintechfutures.com

The post TD Bank inks multi-year strategic partnership with Google Cloud appeared first on HIPTHER Alerts.

Continue Reading

Trending