Member Info for beinthelead

If we get to £20, it’s on the back of impressive LFT sales, and some oncology success. But won’t be all. AVA only. Therefore, only the start.

£50 is where a bid would be looked at, in my opinion. But I’d hope not.

All very positive, but LOTS yet to align. It’s where the value could realistically be, given the markets we are targeting. They all print money.

Without doubt the most telling piece from the update.

Saliva works with THE test, therefore produces similar results.

DHSC are getting what they want. Therefore a customer (no longer a client).

Morning - are we discounting SureScreen? We will sell every test we make. No doubt. But the gov’s relationship with SureScreen, and their sample method contradictions, makes me feel a little less convinced it’s a two horse race.

Sorry, it’s my last niggle on this current opportunity with the government supply.

@leewill Bond Digital are also partnered with Mologic. Could be another dot.

Hi - I’ve tried to keep up with the s/n protein debate, but clearly missed any conclusions on targeting preference.

According the publication below, mutations can negatively affect the performance of diagnostic equipment.

Potential impact on SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics:

“The UK reports that the deletion 69-70 in the spike protein of the variant causes a negative result from S-gene RT-PCR assays applied in some laboratories in the UK [26]. This specific mutation has occurred many times in different countries and is geographically widespread. Assays targeting the S-gene are not widely used for primary detection and only one assay targeting the S-gene is on the list of published in-house assays listed by the WHO [27]. Relying only on the S-gene for primary detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection using RT-PCR is not recommended because mutations are more likely to occur in this gene [28].”

Apologies if I’m comparing apples and oranges, but it is the only part of the puzzle I cannot rationalise.

Thanks

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/SARS-CoV-2-variant-multiple-spike-protein-mutations-United-Kingdom.pdf

Bang on the money.

Very good leewill39.

In addition to my latest posts; this may have been published prior to my own research. However, it may help someone.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323755864_Affimer_Proteins_Theranostics_of_the_Future

Article concludes with:

Finally, fabrication of complex proteins for tailored specifications and applications through advanced protein engineering will be revolutionary in translating basic scientific research to the clinic. There is no doubt that Affimer protein technology will be a game changer for a host of theranostic applications. For this to be effective, strong bridges must continue to develop between academia, industry, and clinical practice, and the fact that Affimer technology is being commercially developed by Avacta® Life Sciences is testament to this. The litmus test for the future is to rapidly and cost-effectively generate renewable binding reagents in sufficiently large quantities for specific applications on demand.

Morning all,

This article discusses and concludes that Affimers offer superior protein binding characteristics vs antibodies.

This adds further weight to Avacta’s USP across its entire platform. Specifically in the case of its diagnostics products.

Abstract

Introduction

Assessing the specificity of protein binders is an essential first step in protein biomarker assay development. Affimers are novel protein binders and can potentially replace antibodies in multiple protein capture-based assays. Affimers are selected for their high specificity against the target protein and have benefits over antibodies like batch-to-batch reproducibility and are stable across a wide range of chemical conditions. Here we mimicked a typical initial screening of affimers and commercially available monoclonal antibodies against two non-related proteins, IL-37b and proinsulin, to assess the potential of affimers as alternative to antibodies.

Methods

Binding specificity of anti-IL-37b and anti-proinsulin affimers and antibodies was investigated via magnetic bead-based capture of their recombinant protein targets in human plasma. Captured proteins were analyzed using SDS-PAGE, Coomassie blue staining, Western blotting and LC-MS/MS-based proteomics.

Results

All affimers and antibodies were able to bind their target protein in human plasma. Gel and LC-MS/MS analysis showed that both affimer and antibody-based captures resulted in co-purified background proteins. However, affimer-based captures showed the highest relative enrichment of IL-37b and proinsulin.

Conclusions

For both proteins tested, affimers show higher specificity in purifying their target proteins from human plasma compared to monoclonal antibodies. These results indicate that affimers are promising antibody-replacement tools for protein biomarker assay development.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341613864_Affimers_as_an_alternative_to_antibodies_for_protein_biomarker_enrichment/fulltext/5ef4e165a6fdcc4ca430f231/Affimers-as-an-alternative-to-antibodies-for-protein-biomarker-enrichment.pdf?origin=publication_detail

Hi All,

The virtues of Affimers have been sung many times. This article concludes that antibody mimetics are the future of diagnostic and immunotherapy, due to their significant advantages of antibodies.

It suggests that the only drawback to mimetics are their upfront engineering production costs, which could restrict their prevalence to big pharma. However, Avatca’s fully funded business model is it’s biggest success to date in my opinion. And this funding is set to be further bolstered by the diagnostics division. Allowing Avacta to complete their field changing work, WITH the main advantage of big pharma - cash.

All of the above has been proclaimed mines times over, but the attached article may give some a non-biased view on the history, and more importantly, future of antibody mimetics.

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20695837113.1067910689.pdf

Agreed. The share price has been reassuringly stable given the lack of news.

If we were progressing through 200p, without confirmatory news, we’d no doubt have and RNS saying ‘nothing to see here...’ Then float backward. Stability here is a good sign. Faith and patience in your investment required.