Member Info for beinthelead

@PJ12 - I was being sarcastic.

*sell

You are in profit. You’ve picked a winner! Time to seek and avoid the impending doom that May is likely to bring.

Awesome. Thanks :)

Agree.

We need revenues from the LFT to protect the SP and smash the rest.

That’s fair NDN. I think that trend would be bucked if we licence the tech. This is where the real value is.

Totally agree.

The CE Mark is not a big deal. People need to stop confusing what it takes to apply a CE mark. Yes it predicates sales, but at this stage it does not hold any weight in the manufacture. The time to apply the mark is in tech file finalisation and sign off.

As kongs states, AS explicitly says Mologic have/are already producing batches as we speak. And ABDX are converting the manufacturing capability to suit the design. Manufacturing is in progress.

This has been highlighted before but worth a bump.

The design of our LFT does not look innovative from the outside, as we know. It uses mologic’s unique established well design. Worth another thought on why Abingdon uses a similar image in their promotional video?

Does anyone with more knowledge know if they use a similar design, therefore machine setups between the two will be as straightforward as it looks?

Avacta LFT: https://avacta.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Avacta-Group-plc-Preliminary-Results-April-2021-for-web.pdf

Abingdon: https://mobile.twitter.com/Abingdon_Health/status/1365354909835608074

Mologic: https://www.technologynetworks.com/diagnostics/product-news/amp/mologic-achieves-breakthrough-in-ultra-sensitive-point-of-care-diagnostics-and-develops-new-319148

Testing will be required in numbers post June. Businesses are all government backed until June, which is when we’ll see the huge demand.

Their post June insurance will be an LFT rather than furlough. Travel demand will be monstrous. Right to fly or sail will be gated by an LFT.

The only constraint is test choice and PR. We have the greatest LFT, but how do we ensure max capacity and sales. We’ll sell a lot. We all need to prepare ourselves to be frustrated by ‘a lot’ being not as much as we could! :)

Thanks for the warning, much appreciated.

Spartacus - I’m in the report camp at the moment. It’s just disruptive. Hijacking threads that bear no relationship to their antagonistic q’s.

Another puzzling one and an example of misleading performance data and use case. Sorry for the long read.

This test has recently received certification for home use in Germany following a 50 person lay study, having already held a CE mark for pro use.

https://www.corporate.siemens-healthineers.com/press/releases/covid19-self-test

Intended Use

“ The CLINITEST® Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test is an in vitro immunochromatographic assay for the qualitative detection of nucleocapsid protein antigen from SARS-CoV-2 in direct nasopharyngeal (NP) swab or nasal swab specimens directly from individuals who are suspected of COVID-19 by their healthcare provider. It is intended to aid in the rapid diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infections and can be used by healthcare professionals up to ten days post symptom onset, or to screen asymptomatic individuals or individuals from areas of low infection prevalence. Negative results from patients with symptom onset beyond ten days should be treated as presumptive and confirmation with a molecular assay, if necessary, for patient management, may be performed. The CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test does not differentiate between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. The test also provides individuals with the option to self-collect their nasal sample under the supervision of a healthcare professional.”

Summary;

Sample - NP or AN
Symptomatic or Asymptomatic
Results in 15 mins
N protein targeting.

AN Sens: 97.25%
AN Spec: 100%

https://cdn0.scrvt.com/39b415fb07de4d9656c7b516d8e2d907/aef3862a159f8063/80b57fc93ae3/CLINITEST-Rapid-COVID-19-Antigen-Test-PI-Healgen-CE-Rev.-G_English.pdf

First glance - superb. But scratch the surface...

It appears to be yet another NP designed test to detect symptom onset individuals, repurposed as an asymptomatic AN test. Ala Innova.

My conclusion was drawn from this study:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.02.21250984v1.full-text

Which evaluates and presents the data in a simple to read, no smoke a mirrors style, Ct value metrics, etc. And...It concludes:

Sens (Symptomatic): 80.2%
Sens (Asymptomatic): 60%

Adding: “ In contrast, the POC performance of this and other RAD assays [1,6], is clearly suboptimal in asymptomatic close-contact individuals, either household or non-household. This was also observed in a previous study using the Panbio RAD assay from Abbott Laboratories“.

In conclusion - it is very bad at detecting asymptomatic individuals and not fit for purpose.

There are so many inconsistencies with tests currently on the market, especially those reacting quickly to the demands of it. AS provided an honest no holds barred view of our test performance. The performance in all areas is first class.

My research tells me it is. Based on what is currently available on the market/or clinically validated.

As a benchmark, use the PD approved list and review the data and sample method for each test and compare with Avacta’s. That’s what I’ve done on a geeky spreadsheet. Do the same and conclude what you deem appropriate.

AS has provided MUCH more info than any other test currently on the market. He’s lifted the bonnet on its development and people still aren’t happy. Every test of concern has contradictory performance data, and is being used in use cases outside of their design.

This test comparison thing has been done to death. They’re either NP Mid-T sample designs. Of course they’re not going to state what they’re NOT designed for.

There’s plenty of evidence, to show these tests have a huge performance drop off when used against their use case.

Stop comparing their performance. Absolutely compare their revenue and place on a HMG list. Quite correct.

Rightly or wrongly, Avacta have the highest performing AN test for infectious monitoring. This is fact. Let’s see if this asset sells and overtakes the current market. This is yet to play out. Hence why were investing, and not buying the future.

:) those settings make it hard not to bump into each other.

The speed is expected really. They’re well established in the field, and having a partner suggests linking with antigen/AN test design third party. Avacta’s delays were creating this from scratch.

It’s en vogue and will certainly add decent value to the SP, and strategically they had to diversify into LFT’s so expected. Good business.

Manufacturing capacity and HMG is where they might have an advantage if the test is ‘good enough’.

I’m confident their performance will not get close to ours. Nowhere near. And for this reason will not be trusted in settings such as travel.

I’m not convinced we will be licensing our tech. But happy to be corrected on the day :)

Totally agree on the in. I’ve said more than enough that the HMG connection is important for so many reasons. None more so than accessing their (now know) monopolised manufacturing capacity :)

I really like how AS hasn’t picked a side with HMG though. He’s kept them as one of many clients. I’m impressed if that’s by design. Other companies/manufacturers are in bed with HMG and that can sting both your pocket and reputation.

Manufacture as much as we can, then work down the list of customers.

We will exit higher NDN. Even at the 5m capacity in May we’ll break 350p. So in 7 months, that’s a great return in my book. Appreciate others have different investment/trading strategies.

Yes, the 5m capacity is all but priced in, but it’ll bring bigger money as the future capacity will only increase.

Let’s face it. There’ll be nerves in the market until Avacta get a test to market. The saliva switch still haunts.

The need for a larger study is for HMG I believe? If PD are interested in the test, they’ll make it happen. Outside of that, let’s CE mark and get to market. Which is what we’re doing. We shouldn’t be hung up on a larger study.

*their