Member Info for Brysoa

Aimtrader. Your posts betray a profound ignorance of microbiology. A mycobacterium is not a virus and vice versa. Kind of key distinction on a site devoted to an antiviral agent, don’t you think?

Positive move by the BoD announced this morning. Yet another step confirming confidence in the strategy both in terms of R&D and of recruitment. Investors should be viewing this favourably; traders … who cares?

… here

Spaceman, I enjoy your informed and informative posts and share your frustration at the lack of progress made by the company as well as the languishing share price.

I do, however, take issue with your criticism of the company for not doing more to bolster the SP at this time. I wonder what you think the company could report in its support if, in reality, there is nothing to report in terms of progress pending intelligence from Universal and the start of the upcoming P2 trials. I am willing to be educated on this point.

The judgement of the CEO and Board is that now is the time to invest in this expensive senior appointment. This must have been based on more than a casual whim. The post, or one very similar in terms of role has been on the stocks for some time but the trigger has not been pulled until now. I do not believe the company is so stupid or negligent as to do so now in the absence of a compelling case.

I see today’s news more as a fundamental R&D re-set than a delay. If we are to believe that the new investigative strategy is an improvement of what went before, then the new timeframe, that we know is supported by the cash runway, is much easier to bear than a delay to the plans set out at the beginning of the year. Still painful, though!

Not too simplistic at all, TP. The problem with the Activ2 study in particular and even with our own P3 is that SNG was squeezed out of the competition for more severe cases. Why, I don’t know but it it a fact that the mix of patients randomised did not reflect that envisaged in the study protocols. The landscape is different now with Covid-19 trials few and far between and, we hope and trust, more rigorous selection criteria and monitoring BY SNG (!) than was the case certainly for the ACTIV study. Ergo, much higher probability of one or more of the shots on goal hitting its target.

Just so, TommyD. It would’ve been nice to have had more, but this “amuse-bouche“ represents confirmation that the study is progressing. The data on biomarkers will be fundamental to the success of the SNG P2 studies and the costs-of-care data will inform discussions with healthcare commissioners and potential partners in due course.

Suit and tie would be a distinct turn-off at a poster session at a meeting like ERS. Dress for the occasion! Also, these guys are interested in the data - end of.

Two posters of relevance to SNG at the ERS today, one on UNIVERSAL and the other by Dr Monk summarising data from SNG001 trials. Both have been flagged here since the ERS programme was announced a coupl3 of months ago.

Yes, indeed. Poster presentation at ERS today.

I’ve just seen this BBC report:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-66750359

Seems that 7 out of 35 patients with Covid-19 required admission to hospital. Most from a nursing home so presumably with a good vaccination history. 20% hospitalisation rate in this demographic.

I would suggest caution in interpreting “future, larger studies”. This is a paper more about the success of a “virtual” study technique than about the material under study. Envisaged future, larger studies may adopt the same distance-based, “virtual” approach, but not necessarily in relation to SNG001.

The medical consensus, unlike that of the world at large currently, is that Covid-19 has joined the ranks of influenza and respiratory syncytial virus, among others, as a permanent challenge to human health.

The good news it that vaccination and exposure-driven immunity have made huge inroads into susceptibility to the virus at a population level. The less good news is that what works for populations as a whole does not necessarily do so for susceptible individuals including the frail, the elderly and the immunocompromised. Mono-clonal antibody based therapies have a part to play but will, forever, be playing catch-up in the battle agains an agile viral master of disguises, able to change its appearance, and therefore, recognisability to antibodies, almost at will. Also on the bad news front, it is proving impossible to squeeze Covid-19 into the “winter flu season” paradigm and its annual vaccine production and administration model. We have seen waves and surges in all seasons.

It’s too early to judge but BA.2.86 is probably not going to turn out t9 be the “big one” in terms of its virulence. But it shows what we are up against and is an indicator of what we are going to face time and again in perpetuity. This is the true context in which we are supporting a small company working to produce a virus and variant agnostic therapeutic effective in this critical battle. The commercial success of SNG001 remains uncertain but none of us should regret our decision to back it. In my opinion it will prove to become an important weapon in the fight against respiratory viral infections, including Covid-19.

Very interesting, The_Paladin. An application for 001 would stand a fair to good chance of success imo but the tactics would need to be worked out carefully: there would be very substantial costs entailed in gearing up to manage the consequences of a successful application - production, distribution, establishment of a register, monitoring, etc. These might be prohibitive for a company the size of SNG. Had the pathway been in place in mid 2020, things might have been different.

MS requires a systemic effect, thus a systemic mode of administration - cheap. SNG001’s USP is maximising effect in the lung with minimal systemic spillover - at substantial cost.

MS requires a systemic effect, thus a systemic mode of administration - cheap. SNG001’s USP is maximising effect in the lung with minimal systemic spillover - at substantial cost.

Courtesy of Reddit, this pre-print review paper opines that IFNs have “colossal potential in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection”

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202307.0367/v1

“ATS 2023 Respiratory Innovation Summit

Washington DC Marriott Marquis

901 Massachusetts Ave NW

Washington, DC 20001

Hosted by the American Thoracic Society, the 2023 Respiratory Innovation Summit will unite the innovators, investors, clinicians and advocacy groups who are leading the charge to create powerful new treatments for deadly and crippling diseases of the lungs and airways. This meeting historically attracts 275+ global leaders representing all facets of the respiratory industry, including representatives from start-ups, business development, venture capital, government, academia and clinical medicine.

All companies innovating in pulmonary, critical care or sleep are encouraged to apply. All applications will be reviewed; 75 companies will be selected for poster presentation. Of those, 20-25 will be also programmed for oral presentation. The agenda also includes venture capital panels, business development panels and plenty of time for networking.”

Thank you, Titania, for sharing this link that I copy here in an attempt to prevent it disappearing under the welter of domestobabble currently dominating the board. Yet further evidence of the centrality of IFN beta to the severity of COVID in individuals.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36451263/