Member Info for Boonco

almost unanimous being a handful of motivated individuals on a chat forum?

Thanks Nickjhe, good find.

The only story no news in 6 weeks tells us is that there’s been no news in 6 weeks.

6 weeks is a significant amount of time if we’re talking about someone on a hunger strike. It’s not a significant amount of time when we’re talking about a company’s news cycle and the stock market.

Ridiculously oversold more like.

It's the British markets doing what they do, fetishising the short-term because they have a pathological aversion to long-term thinking.

because you don't know what the sp will be in 1 month let alone 3, 6, 9 etc and as far as you or I know there's always the chance they could sign any number of partnerships over the next 12 months.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41531-021-00156-z

https://microbiomejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40168-022-01243-w

A buyout is what it says, one company buys another.
As for valuing, it's tricky. Here's a beginners guide https://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/06/biotechvaluation.asp

AUC1,

Yeah that's fair enough, merck would be able to have more trials running at once.

From my perspective though, as someone who invested in 4D because of it's long term potential that doesn't benefit me as I'm not remotely interested in 4D selling out for a small short term profit gain. I'd much rather embrace uncertainty and play the long game.

Covid aside the conventional drug development process typically takes anywhere from 10-15 years.

4D have taken mrx0518 from discovery to where it's currently at for RCC faster than merck or other similar companies would get most of their drugs to a comparable stage (fda accelerated approval and fast-track routes aside, both of which have nothing to do with finance).

So no, when compared to drug development carried out by merck or other such pharma companies 4D haven't been moving at snails pace.

I know what the trial was thanks.

The point isn't the trial, the point is what Sumanta Pal (internationally recognised kol in the space) and his colleagues think with regards to the relevancy of disease control in RCC patients who have had multiple lines of therapy i.e. it's an important endpoint.

"A response for a start Phil. A tumour reduction of 30% or more in a couple of patients.

Stable disease for a few months is a bit borderline for doctors to send patients off for intravenous Keytruda."

You might want to reflect on that sangi. I've posted this previously when the results came out in response to those who were questioning the relevancy of disease control in RCC patients who have had multiple lines of therapy.

https://www.healio.com/news/hematology-oncology/20211112/tivozanib-improves-disease-control-in-advanced-renal-cell-carcinoma??

“The likelihood of measurable renal cell carcinoma tumor response diminishes after [two or more] lines of therapy, and the clinical relevance of prolonged stable disease is increasingly important,” Pal and colleagues wrote. “Previous research in advanced renal cell carcinoma suggests that improvement in disease control rate may correlate with longer-term survival and underscores the contribution of stable disease to patient-level outcomes.”??

"The findings suggest disease control is “an important endpoint” for patients with relapsed or refractory renal cell carcinoma receiving third- or fourth-line treatment, researchers added."

https://gut.bmj.com/content/early/2022/03/10/gutjnl-2021-326264

I hope you don't have acrophobia crl as it's an awful long way down from that moral perch you consider yourself atop.

After exchange rate lbps trading at $5 is equivalent to 48p

He doesn't need to try and keep the price down to get back in, he's got millions of warrants available to him should he want them.

Hi RN1MLT,

In support of what you were trying to convey you made a specific claim about what the company said in the annual report/rns/webcast and that claim was incorrect hence my response. I think it is important that we are objective and honest about what has been said, what we know for a fact and what is speculation, as I’m sure you do too.

“My point is made by reading the SEP 21 statement in conjunction with March update and not reading them individually. RCC is the only disease group advance enough in September to give positive signals to warrant spending resources to plan for a phase 3 study.”

How do you know that RCC was the only group advance enough in September?

In order to reasonably make that link you would need to know the in-trial progress of the different groups at that point in time. Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I’m aware 4D has never released such information or said anything on the matter. That leads me to think that you are making the link based on assumption.

?“On one hand you acknowledge that they are working towards a phase 3 in oncology but it being in RCC is a speculation and then go on to argue that the talk of phase 3 in oncology itself is a speculation.”

When they released the half year report in September, based on what was known at that time I interpreted the statement you referenced as management indicating that the trial is progressing well and that, with the little bit of luck every company needs, their intention is to progress to a pivotal trial in 2022. I didn’t then and I don’t now in hindsight interpret it as management saying that they were already putting a phase 3 trial together, much less make the leap to thinking that they were saying such in relation to RCC. As I’ve already noted, 4D has never released any information or said anything about the in-trial progress of any groups at that point in time. Without such information and however you choose to interpret management's statement, trying to link it to RCC (or any specific group) is speculating.

4D has not yet confirmed that they will be doing a phase 3 trial for RCC. What they have said is that they are going to investigate a potentially pivotal trial with their advisory board. Personally, I do think that they will try to get approval for ICI-refractory RCC, it has met the primary endpoint and they have the safety aspect on their side so why wouldn’t they try for it. Whether they would choose to go the phase 3 route or try to go the accelerated approval route if that’s open to them, who knows. At this point though and regardless of however favourable we might consider the odds of progressing to be, until they confirm what they are going to do we simply do not know for sure.

Given the positive results to date and the frankly fantastic potential that 4D has as a company, I’m comfortable with that uncertainty and I’ll continue to embrace it for the long haul.

Until that info is publicly available they'll probably do what small companies like mace, keltbray and acciona have done - contact afc, ask about the products and engage with them.

Thanks to those of you who attended the AGM and posted your thoughts, it's much appreciated.

Sangi,

I asked where in the annual report and I was specific about it being the annual report because that is what RN1MLT claimed. Your response had nothing to do with the annual report.

As for the oncology update rns and webcast, as I've said in neither of those do they confirm that they are or have developed a phase 3 as per RN1MLT's claim. They say they are going to discuss a potential pivotal with the advisory board.

You know I'm long and bullish on 4D from what I've said on here previous. If people claim something has been said when it hasn't though or if I consider their reasoning flawed, I will disagree and reason otherwise (when I can be bothered).