Member Info for BuenaVista

Carry on digging eggy

Complete non-issue and completely wrong representation.

Oncologists care about efficacy and side effect, not eggy's constant half-life drivel.

Share price is down because Avacta will need lots of money for trials and traders can't see where that will come from. A financing deal will send the share price through the roof.

It's one of the HEMO cultists and a bit of an idiot if truth be told.

My guess is that oncologists are more concerned with whether a drug given every 3 weeks reverses tumors whilst causing minimal side-effects than they are with the half-life of the drug.

Share is now well into oversold territory.

The irony is that briliant trial and preclinical findings just ring up $$$ signs in people's minds when they think ahead to what future trials are going to cost ...and where's the money coming from for them? Placings and dilution, people assume. The share price would reverse like a rocket launching should Avacta secure a credible funding deal. They have about four months to find funding before having to resort to a placing. Pharma know that so Avacta has a weak hand. But there are alternatives amongst finacial institutions. If all else fails, I hope there will be a retail placing in the new tax year.

Touk, I obviously don't know what trial you are on but if a company is trialling a drug that is under patent then they obviously want to streamline the trial, as they want to streamline everything, so that the drug can be got to market asap so as to enjoy the longest possible patent protection, with the proviso that cutting corners doesn't always make for the fastest route.

They won't talk about any application like that unless or until it is approved.

I think it will recover. At least a bit. Traders will have taken their profits and be buying back in now that the share price is hanging around the oversold region.

...has gone. After all that talk of a breast cancer franchise, the indications for AVA6103 Phase 1 are already being declared as gastric, pancreatic, cervical and small cell lung cancers: https://avacta.wistia.com/medias/thz9au7cnj @ 25:15.

No breast cancer amongst those indications. Back in R&D spotlight 8 on 29 January 2025 ( https://avacta.wistia.com/medias/kbn3w56eye ) @ 10:50 the patient plot for breast cancer HR+, HER- is shown as pretty well equivalent to pancreatic cancer as a target emerging from the Tempus AI collaboration.

As they are looking for a partner for faridox in TNBC, maybe they have one or more lined up for the whole 'franchise'? After all, they are a very expensive indications for taking a drug through clinical trials to market. 'Avacta, your one-stop shop for breast cancer therapies'

Fill yer boots folks!

I thought you were busy bothering nurses

I see you as having no credibility or integrity, meaning nothing you say can be taken at face value, eggy.

Eggy, see at 8:20.

Doxorubicin half-life is 35 hours, meaning half of conventional doxorubicin is still circulating nearly a day and a half after iv infusion. Faridox, because it releases doxorubicin at the site of the tumour, has extended this half-life by 40%. And that is more than ample for a working prodrug.

Exatecan half-life is 9 hours and fundamental to why it failed in the clinic, which is why Avacta needed to design a sustained release version - AVA6103.

Avacta and lab results say half-life isn't a problem for either drug. If you can't accept that, at a distance from the experiments and lab results, then what does that say about you?

Maybe you don't realise that the half-life of the pre|CISION substrate (note: not platform - that's a technique, not a chemical) is totally irrelevant in this because it is inert - uncleaved AVA6000 just leaves the body. So, not enough AVA6000 getting to the tumour to cause a suitably strong therapeutic effect? Simple. just increase the dose, which is perfectly fine as long as it's not causing dose limiting toxicity. What do you think the Phase 1a trial has been about these past few years?

Alternatively again, she may have just finished a presentation to another group of people - farmers or investors - that may* or may not have gone well for her. She did at the start really sound as though she was tired of going over the same content (again).

* so well that a deal is in the bag and the webinar for us was just a formality needing to be honoured.😂

I wasn't able to listen live and have only had a rushed listen whilst doing other things. Will give it a proper listen later - no hurry now.

If CC was in the US, that would have been a 5am webinar start for her - up at ?... 4am? And dave over on the West Coast?... If in the UK, not an excuse for being low energy although she may have been disappointed by the negative share price reaction - but she should have angled the RNS better to the British AIM layman audience.

She may also have noted the share price dip badly when she started talking Phase 2 - the implication being more expense.

I did notice that the Q&A ended abruptly, which was very strange, so an alternative take on th ewebinar is that it was prerecorded and someone messed up the editing. Did anyone have their in-webinar question put to CC? (I'd really like an honest description of how and when questions are selected - surely Avacta wouldn't leave such an important role and responsibility as that to the IMC moderator???!)

Theirs a lot of truth in that Nlgb. Seams to work well on this bored.

Quote from Jennifer Specht: "My expertise includes treating women with triple-negative breast cancer, an aggressive form of the disease that does not respond to hormonal medications. At Fred Hutch, I ... and lead the Phase 1 Breast Cancer Program, which tests the safety and efficacy of novel breast cancer therapies."

Oops, didn't read the bit about him transferring...

Anyway, here's Jennifer M. Specht, MD: https://www.fredhutch.org/en/provider-directory/jennifer-m-specht.html

Diseases Treated: Breast Cancer

Maybe they're not doing much or any STS there with faridox?

I only snatched a quick listen to the presentation and Q&A post-webinar but didn't CC say Phase 2 would (likely) be a 2:1 comparison? - 2 patients on faridox for every patient on their clinician's choice of chemo. The choice being because, there being no SoC, clinicians currently make their decisions on what chemo to use based on several factors to do with the patient and their state and the cancer and it's state.