Member Info for BuenaVista

Taking TNBC through trials to the market will take a LOT of money and a LOT of time. That is why they said they want to partner with a major player for TNBC. If SGC and partnering for TNBC goes well and there is funding available, then faridoxorubicin for STS opens up, although there may be other priorities by then (AVA6103, AVA6207, ...?) or another company could take it forward. I think we are in a very fluid ideas period at the moment until the deals start being struck and we know more about which candidate drugs, which indications and which partners/licencees there are.

...and they received different doses of AVA6000 and had different cancer sub-typyes, some more responsive to doxorubicin than others.

Yes, as far as efficacy goes, these were two very small heterogenous indication cohorts. What they saw in Phase 1a was the absolute minimum that can be expected in terms of efficacy.

In contrast, the SGC patients responded at higher doses.

310 mg/m2 Q3W - 6th best response

385 mg/m2 Q3W - PR

385/200 mg/m2 Q3W - 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th and 8th best responses

250 mg/m2 Q2W - 2nd best response

The target patient population swung to SGC in these later cohorts.

https://avacta.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/ESMO-2025_vfinal.pdf

Fair enough opti, but there will be many here who don't know what's involved in a poster presentation.

If you examine the poster eggy, you'll see that the STS data come very largely from the earlier, lower dose, cohorts. And that produced partial responses in two of the (terminally ill, pre-treated, etc.) patients.

160 mg/m2 Q3W - top partial response (PR)

200 mg/m2 Q3W

250 mg/m2 Q3W - 2nd best PR, plus the 3rd best response

310 mg/m2 Q3W

385 mg/m2 Q3W - 5th best response

160 mg/m2 Q2W - 4th best response

250 mg/m2 Q2W

Reviews aren't really up to date articles as they report on reports of earlier work and are themselves some time in compilation, submission and acceptance. From a quick look, this one doesn't seem to cover conferences, which is a big omission. It also omits patents. Ouch! As Avacta's PDCs have only appeared in conference abstracts and patents (and even then as Bachovchin patents), then we are invisible to this review. It's also my impression that we've only recently started to emphasise the 'PDC' term.

The easiest way to get into a review is by publishing a peer-reviewed article with PDC or peptide drug conjugate in the title.

It's obviously not a 3 hour presentation. It's a poster, one of hundreds in the hall. Francis Wilson will stand in front of it and talk about it to anyone who passes by and shows interest, so group talks and on an individual level answering questions and going deeper into the science.

Everyone knows Ribena is Ribena, no matter how much it's diluted.

For context:

"Inclusion Criteria:

"5. Has a life expectancy of ≥12 weeks, in the opinion of the investigator."

...but not on the Avacta home page as promised. Nor the News page. Nor on the Events page.

I'm shocked.😨 What are they hiding from the market?😱

Remember, ipsa scientia potestas est.

They've been busy organising a strict ticketting system for big farmer appointments and laying on the Yorkshire tea and Nice biscuits.

"End Oct we should hit 90...😉"

80 on 6th November

Why do you think the share price has dropped to the 63p sell level then? Those that could make a quick profit have done so, others might whenever the share price rises to a level that they think makes selling worth their while. I didn't say 'all'; they can't all get a quick profit. Why do people think these NHWIs are saints, or is the term 'angels'? They're in it to make as much money as they can - that's how they got rich. McNulty probably at the head of the queue.

No Bella, what they do is sell their existing holdings at above 63p and then receive the same number of shares back at 63p. That puts a sort of floor under the share price drop.

I thought STS was deprioritised, not because it was too hard as such, but because it would take a lot longer than was originally envisaged due to the longer straight doxorubicin PFS in the trial published by Boehringer Ingelheim.

But even 'small' mistakes can have devastating consequences. Remember that slide that had to be pulled because it disclosed IP that hadn't been patent-protected? Depending on how fundamental the invention was, such prior disclosure could have ruined the company - all that time and effort and money down the drain, no valuable IP, and no resources to invent something new.

Tony Gardiner strange grip on maths?

The '9' that got dropped from an RNS during editing?

Sitting around twiddling thumbs waiting for approval of that European LFT submission that hadn't been submitted?

Frankly, a company that can't get the basic stuff right leaves questions about doing the important stuff right because the important stuff consists of lots and lots of little bits of basic stuff.

https://avacta.com/investors/events/

'Avacta will present an Investor Meet conference to review the published data on Tuesday October 21, 2025. Details for the webinar will be posted on the Avacta home page. '

Avacta. Helping people plan their day since 19 October 2025.

Lol

https://media1.tenor.com/m/ogEmYGu9T4EAAAAC/alegria.gif

This isn't about RH or the fundraise discount or dilution; it is about greed.

Anyway, I've reported the trade to the FCA. If others also think it worth investigating then please complete the very simple form.