Member Info for BuenaVista

We're a long way away from any need for a placing.

British Bulls issued a Sell recommendation on Friday. Current recommendation is Stay in cash with the comment "A more cautious approach may be necessary, but there is no clear signal prompting immediate action that would disrupt the comfort of staying on the sidelines", a comment that of course is based on technical analysis and ignores what may be happening with the company in the real world. The British Bulls record for Avacta over the past six months isn't great: £100 → £101 with a lack of clarity about what tim eof day the recommendations are issued and no account taken of the drag of dealing charges.

The share price will reverse when 1) the trolls disappear as their entry price has been reached or 2) the company issues some good financial news (and the trolls magically disappear - poof!).

Thornogson ...not a serious person

Wyndrum ...not a serious person.

I think he just gets frustrated having to wait for the tea and biscuits to come round. They should really take his ZX away.

Professor Eggy!😂😂😂 Professor of Circus Amusements.🤡

Eggy, Wyn & Derek, the 3 'Professors'.

😂😂😂

WHAT?!!!! You mean Eggy was lying (again)?????

"CC did kind of say as much last week" - full quote please, or you are talking through your nether region.

One of the clinicians - can't remember who - said that whilst the doxorubicin course is 6 cycles, several patients can't take more than 2 before they quit because they feel so rotten. Anyone who has experienced nausea from alcohol, tummy bug or sea sickness will know the feeling - "I'd rather die." So, as well as fewer and less severe side effects, one can also add improved compliance to the AVA6000 case as well as the obvious longer duration of treatment.

The fact is, no one knows how effective a long course of doxorubicin in the treatment setting would be because the maximum up until now has only been 6 cycles/18 weeks.

You'd think that with a name that carried the country's name, DB would be a well respected, reputable company but it is absoutely not to be trusted (see their 1.5 Trustpilot score), including the brokerage arm: their downgrade of Avacta to a sell rating last year was PURE market manipulation to create a low entry point.

🍿

🥱😴

No more please

"Now you want to compare the share price of ROQ since they IPO'd!!" [in March 2021].

Bottmzup wrote in OP: "Stand back and look at the share price chart over the last 5 years."

🙄🤷🏼‍♂️

@Bottmzup, on Roquefort Therapeutics, a comparison of share prices with Avacta shows that over the last 6 months to the last 3 years, the Avacta share price has performed better. The 5 year comparison doesn't make sense as Roquefort IPO'ed in March 2021.

Follow https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/r/roquefort-therapeutics-plc-ord-gbp0.01/share-charts link and add AVCT as comparison.

Additionally, re: "Roquefort Therapeutics' portfolio consists of five novel patent-protected pre-clinical anti-cancer and immunology assets", well AVA6000, AVA6103 and AVA7100 are all 'anti-cancer assets', so what's so special about Roquefort's anti-cancer assets?

@Bottmzup, so basically you can't name any of the new tech, their likelihoods of success nor timescales to market.

There's no point trying to put the onus of knowing this back on me when it's you that is claiming it! You can't make a broad bland statement and then disappear. That's not how making your case in an argument works. Back your statement up if, after your research, you truly believe it.

@Bottmzup, who wrote "Amidst these endless phased trials and financial woes, the rest of the world are coming up with all kinds of new tech solutions for actually beating cancers, putting the whole offering that AVCT could eventually come up with at a commercial level, as a bit part player. ... while the rest of the world moves on with new technology, developments and inventions...with AI etc!"

What are these new technologies? Would you care to name them, with their likelihoods of success and timescales to market? I'd be very interested to hear you thoughts on why pharma (and other?) companies are investing in them and not in old tech like ADCs.

The news story is 'a therapy is being made available on the NHS in England in a world first'. The patient's story is the human angle. We don't have a news story yet.

This GSK experience exemplifies the importance of getting the dosing regimen right as early as possible in treatment naive patients, something that Avacta is doing, as much as it is possible to do (there are competing TNBC treatments):

Phase 1b: patients with histological or cytological confirmation of a locally advanced (unresectable) and/or metastatic tumour of one of the following types:

1. High grade soft tissue sarcoma: histologically proven locally advanced or metastatic, unresectable progressive or recurrent DDLS or UPS who have received 0 or 1 prior lines of therapy in the locally advanced or metastatic setting.

2. SGC: Locally advanced or metastatic salivary gland confirmed by histopathology that cannot be completely resected by surgery who have received 0 or 1 prior lines of therapy in the locally advanced or metastatic setting. In addition, patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma subtypes must not have received prior cytotoxic therapy for locally advanced or metastatic disease. Adenoid cystic carcinoma subtype to be capped at 15 patients (assuming cohort of approximately 30 patients).

3. TNBC: Locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer confirmed by histopathology who have received up to 2 lines of prior therapy in the locally advanced or metastatic setting. BRCA with PD-L1 negative.

Idiot

Also from the BBC article: "The infusion takes around half an hour. Paul is having one every two months, while others have it every three weeks as research continues to work out which plan gives the best results."

This describes DREAMM-14, the latest in teh DREAMM series of trials: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05064358?term=belantamab%20mafodotin%20dreamm&rank=1

"Brief Summary

"This study aims to evaluate alternative dosing regimens of single-agent belantamab mafodotin in participants with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) to determine if an improved overall benefit/risk profile can be achieved by modifying the belantamab mafodotin dose, schedule, or both."

So GSK are doing - or had to go back and redo - their optimal dose & schedule finding at the END of the clinical development process... A note to the unwary: Avacta spent a lot of time doing this with a lot fewer patients at the BEGINNING, in Phase 1a of the AVA6000 clincal development process.