Member Info for BuenaVista

TofD, well not completely binding. There is always the post-market surveillance, which is for every newly approved drug, to identify whether there are any identified and mitigable adverse reactions – conditions to go into the doctors' detailed version of the patient information leaflet.

He's in again. Expect lots of positive posts🥱 ...until he's out again.🥱

🦭

"continues to progress" ... "potential partners" ... well Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah. Laura, I've got a bridge to sell you. It could be on a potential new main route from Newcastle to Southampton.

Google and Gemini are your friend: https://www.google.com/search?q=What+is+the+difference+between+a+FDA+accelerated+approval+and+a+FDA+full+approval%3F

You should know that, being the father of AI.

Double apologies, not the wrong thread. It was a response to the OP (which, because of the chrono-/reverse-chrono-post order, I thought was that last post here). Anyway, I'll stick to just reverse-chronological order in future.

Apologies. Wrong thread.

But Avacta won't be manufacturing, marketting and selling faridox for SGC, not with Avacta's limited cash and personnel resources. All that will go to an established company that is already set up to do it. So why go through all the expense of a pivotal Phase 2 faridox trial when resources are needed even now for AVA6103 and AVA6207?

A Phase 3 trial may not be needed to confirm efficacy (PFS, OS, etc. in this case) but a post-marketting Phase 4 trial and adverse report monitoring will be needed, as with with all newly marketted drugs, to pick up any outlier reactions. That however can be funded out of sales and, depending on how Avacta progresses the pivotal faridox Phase 2 trial, will likely be the responsibility of the partnering company/licensee.

Does your little ego feel better now you've posted that to make whatever point you're trying to make?

Sure, you're invested. That's why you're always knocking the company.

Isn't it usual for MMs to drop the price if there is good news? Encourages selling of shares which they can then sell themselves at a higher price.

The delivery of >1 warhead simultaneously was NOT the purpose of AVA7100. The purpose was PK manipulation, which has been achieved by AVA6103 and largely obviated by the discovery that even a very low FAP level will cause adequate cleavage.

@B2HS2L

"Aldebaran - 7100 is the product necessary IMO to successfully deliver >2 drugs simultaneously. Therefore no plans to deliver >2 drugs simultaneously presently IMO. Prospective partners know what 7100 can deliver."

I don't fully understand what you wrote — you seem to be confusing AVA7100 (AffyDCs) with AVA6207 (dual warheads)?

Thanks for the reminder WF. I'd completely forgotten about the rebate. Mine had been sitting there since Monday.

I don't remember Avacta saying they would sell AVA6000. Partnering/licensing out was always the intention.

What do you mean by selling? Selling what?

No MTD found, no PFS measurable, this pre|CISION thing's a rubbish investment.

Pivotal Phase 2 trial, would need confirming post-approval by a Phase 3 trial.

Https://avacta.wistia.com/s/xi4ktvnhpkyozfz

Still got today, and probably tomorrow and potentially the weekend to talk turkish with big farmer.

Https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/AVCT/platform-validating-data-with-faridoxorubicin/17655942

At the bottom: "Based on the highly favorable response data in the cohort of patients with low FAP expression, Avacta has terminated the AVA7100 Affimer® Drug Conjugate program, originally designed to optimize targeting by pre|CISION® in low-FAP tumor types. This does not impact ongoing collaborations with Affimer® targeted therapies."