u/Freedom5567

I was digging through the actual ISPOR presentation database and found more than just the original headline about up to 40% cost reduction.

This is where it gets interesting.

The presentation appears to frame CNSide not only around lowering healthcare costs, but also around improving patient outcomes and quality of life measurements used by payers. That matters because reimbursement discussions are not only about “does it work?” but also “does it improve care while lowering costs?”

Some points that stood out:

Up to 40% reduction in LM related healthcare costs

LM care costs can exceed $100,000 per month in advanced cases

Median inpatient admissions around $20,000

Discussion around QALY measurements which are commonly used in payer and reimbursement analysis

This is not new REYOBIQ efficacy data and this is not an OS update, so I want to be clear about that.

But if CNSide can potentially improve detection, reduce healthcare burden, and support better patient outcomes, that starts becoming a broader commercialization story rather than simply a diagnostic test story.

Clinical data moves stocks. Reimbursement and adoption can build businesses.

Just my thoughts after digging through the ISPOR material.

Source / ISPOR presentation:

https://www.ispor.org/heor-resources/presentations-database/presentation-cti/ispor-2026/poster-session-1-4/economic-impact-of-earlier-detection-and-therapeutic-management-of-leptomeningeal-metastases-using-cnside-a-cost-of-care-analysis

CNSide keeps advancing commercially. Medicare enrollment is now complete, they secured the PLA billing code, added Blue Shield of California, and are now at roughly 81M covered lives. They also reaffirmed the goal of exceeding 150M covered lives in 2026. That side of the business is clearly moving forward.

REYOBIQ also continues progressing across LM, GBM, and pediatric brain cancer.

One thing that really stood out to me was the FDA Orphan Drug Designation update. PSTV originally requested designation for pediatric malignant gliomas, but the FDA actually broadened the designation beyond what the company requested to also include progressive pediatric ependymoma.

That is not something the FDA had to do.

To me, that suggests the agency may see broader potential applicability for REYOBIQ across pediatric CNS tumors and highlights the level of unmet need in these indications. It does not guarantee approval obviously, but I do think it was an important detail in the release that Some people may overlook.

They also continue scaling manufacturing with SpectronRx added as a second GMP site. Small biotechs usually do not invest heavily into commercial manufacturing readiness unless they believe they have a real path forward.

The company also reaffirmed constructive FDA feedback and continued pivotal-trial readiness language.

Most importantly in my opinion: LM data is expected in Q3 2026.

If LM shows strong survival improvement again, I think the market could begin seriously re-rating PSTV well before GBM data even arrives. A move back above the $9.50 warrant level would obviously become a major point of interest because warrant exercises could potentially bring in substantial additional capital, potentially extending runway further into 2027 without the company immediately needing another financing.

Cash burn is still real of course. Operating expenses increased as they expanded CNSide commercialization and continued Phase 2 execution. This is still a clinical-stage biotech, so execution matters.

GBM timing also appears to have shifted slightly from prior expectations. Earlier investor expectations were leaning toward late 2026 data, while today’s release now guides GBM data into Q1 2027. Personally, I do not view that as thesis-breaking, but it is fair to acknowledge it.

Overall though, today’s update still looked more like a company actively building toward commercialization and pivotal readiness rather than one slowing down.

People are starting to miss the bigger picture here.

Look at what is already being shown with REYOBIQ.

For recurrent GBM, historical therapies such as bevacizumab based approaches have often shown median overall survival in roughly the 7 to 10 month range, while PSTV has already reported approximately 17 months median overall survival in patients receiving ≥100 Gy. That is approaching 2x historical survival ranges and is not something you casually ignore.

Now look at LM.

LM is one of the most devastating CNS conditions with historical survival often around 2 to 6 months, and PSTV has already reported approximately 9 months median overall survival at the recommended Phase 2 dose. Depending on the comparison used, that represents a meaningful improvement versus historical outcomes.

And here is the part many seem to overlook…

This is not even including the ongoing Phase 2 strategy involving multiple doses.

The GBM data discussed above came from earlier findings, and LM has moved into a multidose design intended to optimize therapeutic exposure. Nobody can claim improved survival yet because the data still has to mature, but if increased and sustained exposure translates into better outcomes, the upside becomes very interesting.

Then add everything else around it:

CNSide reimbursement progress

Medicare enrollment progress

Manufacturing scale up already underway

FDA discussions involving overall survival and accelerated approval pathways

Diagnostics and therapeutics under one roof

At some point the discussion changes from “Can PSTV survive?” to “How big can PSTV become if the data continues holding up?”

Not financial advice. Just connecting publicly available information.

TLDR: REYOBIQ is showing about 17 month survival in recurrent Glioblastoma, outperforming current drugs like Bevacizumab and Lomustine while approaching frontline outcomes. That is not something you typically see in this setting.

I wanted to compare REYOBIQ directly against current treatments for Glioblastoma because there are already established options, and I wanted to understand what actually makes this different.

After digging into the data, I was honestly surprised by how limited outcomes still are with the therapies we have today.

Standard of care with surgery, radiation, and Temozolomide gives around 14 to 18 months in newly diagnosed patients. Add Optune and you might push that closer to 20 months, but that is still frontline.

Once it recurs, which it almost always does, things drop off fast. Most patients end up on Bevacizumab or Lomustine, and survival is typically just 6 to 9 months.

That is the reality today.

Now compare that to REYOBIQ.

In the higher dose group, patients are showing around 17 months overall survival in recurrent GBM.

That is the part that stands out.

You are looking at survival that is approaching, and in some cases matching, frontline outcomes, but in a much tougher recurrent setting where current treatments struggle to reach even half of that.

The fact that it is already outperforming current recurrent GBM treatments like Bevacizumab and Lomustine is what makes this signal so important.

And it is not just a random spike. The data shows a dose response. Higher absorbed radiation is translating into longer survival, which is exactly what you would expect if the treatment is working.

It is still early and needs to hold, but this is not the kind of signal you typically see unless something real is happening.

At the end of the day, beyond all the data and comparisons, this is really about patients.

For people facing Glioblastoma, the outlook today is incredibly difficult, and options are limited.

If REYOBIQ continues to show what it has so far, it has the potential to give patients something they rarely get in this setting meaningful time and a real chance at a better outcome.

I personally found this to be quite compelling and felt it was worth sharing.