Member Info for Bella6532

Seems to me, the more Avacta do themselves, the more data they collect, the more valuable the data makes the end product and ultimately the pipeline.

This time of year markets/shares often see selling down as Summer holidays loom...no worries it's normal and AIM is often where it's seen most...Oh those pesky PIs...

RAH0084. What about the effect on the tumour(s).

We've been told there has been no growth but what about shrinkage.

I know 1a is about safety but the more cycles a patient undergoes at such high does, then surely they must be starting to see some shrinkage otherwise why bother using dox in the first place because dox is all about shrinking cancers.

Taken from: Prelim Results for the 12 Months Period

Ending 31st December 2021

Another reminder:

'Phase 1a Dose Escalation Study

Primary Objectives:

• To evaluate the safety and tolerability of AVA6000.

• To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and/or

the Recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D) for the dose

expansion phase'

They don't have to go all the way to MTD...they can go with an agreed RP2D which could be after 5 or 6....

Just a reminder...mice trials went to x6 and:

'AVA6000: The estimated market size (peak sales) of a safer/more efficacious form of

doxorubicin in just three indications (ASTS, breast and ovarian cancer), in the US/EU

alone, is $1.5bn* pa.

• A licensing agreement with a large pharma partner should deliver 10% royalties on sales

to Avacta.'

10% is £150m isn't it?

Because Avacta have already put the above in writing for all to see, does that mean they're pretty vonfident they have such a deal in place or does it mean they've laid down the bar...take it or leave it...we want 10%...simples.

LLP...isn't it also somewhat unethical to give placebos in trials. Unfortunately, trials are by their nature difficult and hats off to anyone who untertakes them.

The ultimate...Avacta developes a range of cancer detecting LFT's based on their affimer tech. These can be used by anyone anywhere...early detection being the key.

Once detected then over to an Avacta PreCision based product to zap the sucker...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9406634/

What's not to like...

Correct me I'm wrong but Avacta has stated that if AVA6000 does what it's meant to do then that will open up the pipeline. In my very humble opinion we could start licencing off that pipeline at any time should others have the confidence to take it forward with or without us. When I say 'with us' a licence deal can be a joint venture/alliance agreement type deal...

Kong1...'AVA6000 wasn’t supposed to be beneficial to the patients enrolled.'

I don't think that was ever said/muted was it? I thought the mouse trials showed otherwise.

RAH0084...'20 cycles should take 60 weeks. Imagine it taking 20 weeks with same impact.'

Beg to differ...I would much prefer to imagine it taking 20 weeks or less with far better impact...ie no nasty side effects, no damage to other organs and AVA 6000 tagetting and delivering dox to every itsy bitsy cancer cell...

BTW how targetted is Dox on it's own?

RAH0084...could they divide the trial into 2...with 1/2 moving onto 1b and the other 1/2 continuing on 1a until MTD is found and then they move over to 1b...

What I would like to see is a PI stand up in the AGM and ask the II's present why they aren't doing something about one TW and his band of nut jobs...

54retiresoon...'The standard of care for STS is doxorubicin. STS expert Dr William Tap said "if I have a doxorubicin that works better than standard doxorubicin overnight that becomes standard of care"

Exactly...and Dr. William Tap is probably more frustrated than we are that AVA6000 isn't readily available right now....

Older...there are clear guideline the industry follow and accept when it comes to trial sequence. I'm sur Avacta would love to release all the data they have thus far and crow about the significant results - they could because it's not a closed trial. However, in order for the trial to have full credibility they have to follow the 1a then 1b etc steps. Laborious to we impatient PI's but extremely important as far as trial credibility goes. Data presented to the markets is not the same as data presented to potential interested parties who may have full access under NDA's.

BV...'In summary, blady fuging incredible result given this trial was looking at safety and tolerability and not at treatment!'

Exactly!...!a is about safely....NOT treatment....but they've shown:

AVA6000 is safe...extremely tolerable and IT HAS ACTUALLY TREATED THE TUMOUR(S)...

Moneysponge...the patients wouldn't be tolerating these high doses if it was just Dox at these doses...if you've undergone cancer treatment you'd perhaps understand the significance.

Yes it's extremely signigicant especially for the patients who have seen no further progression and are not suffering the horrendous side effects of dox. I've nursed my husband through cancer treatment side effects and it's no joke...

And so do they...

https://pharmaceuticalmanufacturer.media/pharma-manufacturing-news/avacta-announces-successful-completion-of-fifth-dose-escalat/

They know...

https://www.pharmatimes.com/news/avacta_announces_ava6000_dose_escalation_results_1493696

Nanomat...I assume you will be raising your concerns at the AGM...!!!! Hindsight is a wonderful thing. In reality, they needed real commitment from one or more II's to get the £50m odd. The small Open Offer to PI's was just a gesture to keep us happy. Due to Govenment regs etc, fundraising for small AIM companies like Avacta is very difficult and AS as much said so and vented his frustrations in this regard in the newspaper letter he wrote. I don't see it was a stitch up, they knew how much they needed and went for it .

And what did the US Cancer Specialist say...if this does what it says on the tin then it will become immediately the treatment standard...or words to that effect...