Member Info for BuenaVista

@Aldebaran, the key point as regards "better PFS even in a small sample size" is the sample size, specifically a statistically significant sample size. I don't think Avacta is there yet with sample size as "11 patients with salivary gland cancers have been treated with AVA6000 at or above the dose of 250 mg/m2 and above [yesterday's RNS]" means different doses (and frequencies?), and also different starting conditions for the 11 patients in the metastatic setting (meaning different treatment histories). However during Phase 1b all will become clear as the sample size and starting conditions will be much better characterised.

Infighting within Reform?! Never mnd Eggy Soldier, Winnifrith will be slitting his wrists! Let's hope he's not using one of his Russian blades. We've all seen you useless the Russian equipment is in Ukraine.

FUD is an abbreviation for "fear, uncertainty, and doubt". It's a manipulative tactic used to influence people's perceptions by spreading negative information.

How is FUD used?

• In sales, marketing, and public relations, FUD is used to influence people's perceptions.

• In politics, FUD is used to influence people's perceptions.

• In polling, FUD is used to influence people's perceptions.

• In cults, FUD is used to influence people's perceptions.

• In the stock market and the crypto industry, FUD is used to describe a general mindset of pessimism about a particular asset or market.

'Google is your friend'

Being somewhat bored, I decided to see what Winnifrith's employee was posting. Well, there's nothing since 13:09 yesterday: "He specifically mentions that he's happy to be involved 'in this disease setting going forward'. An odd thing to say? Not happy to be involved with the Breast or Sarcoma trials?"

Eggy was of course talking about Alan Ho, MD PhD, given (for anyone who cared to read it) in yesterday's RNS as Chief of the Head and Neck Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Oh Professor Eggy! Why are you so dim???

Winnifrith must have been using the Russian AI app, Grokov (translation: Eggy soldier on face), for his assessment of yesterday's RNSes.

Forgot to add:

The current lifetime limit for straight doxorubicin is very easy to calculate as it is simply the total amount of doxorubicin administered. For AVA6000, the amount of free doxorubicin in the plasma is very likely to vary from patient to patient, cancer to cancer, and cancer stage to cancer stage, hence either measurement for all dosings or a surrogate would be needed.

My understanding is that all patients remain on the trial and continue to be dosed (according to their cohort's dose regimen) for as long as their cancer is not progressing and, barring any other reason for stopping, until they reach the maximum lifetime cumulative dose of doxorubicin according to plasma measurements.

According to plasma measurements because that is the doxorubicin that reaches the heart and doxorubicin killing myocardial cells in the heart is the limiting factor for its use.

I hope Avacta can develop a surrogate method of calculating doxorubicin in plasma as it seems very fiddly and time consuming to have to measure it (the Area Under the Curve - AUC) for each dosing. Maybe monitor heart function? Maybe some quick bioassay? (Cue a Coris Affimer test!🤣)

Well the first question is whether the two transactions resulted in a change of ownership from one entity to another. They weren't a trade and then a reversal of that trade (negative trade) so I guess they were and were either two sells, two buys or a mediated sell and buy.

Was anyone holding 17.38m shares, 4.62% of the shares in issue? I'm pretty sure the answer to that is no, or at least no one had admitted holding that many, even Heights, so it wasn't two sells.

Was anyone holding 8.69m shares, 2.31% of the shares in issue? Well, AXA are recorded as holding 8.688m shares (2 x 4.344m) as AXA Investment Managers UK Ltd and UTM IM GBP AXA Framlington Biotech ( https://www.fidelity.co.uk/factsheet-data/factsheet/GB00BYYW9G87-avacta-group-plc/profile ). These two entries are exact duplicates, as are the two entries for Unicorn Asset Management Ltd and Unicorn AIM VCT Series 3 ORD, which rather suggests that they are just duplicated records for holding company and fund and that the shares held by AXA is actually only 4.344m. Unless of course it is standard practice for the holding company to hold the exact same number of shares as each of their funds (some sort of insurance??). If it is standard practice, then for AXA to sell out completely would suggest a complete loss of faith in Avacta, in which case they hopefully jumped too soon (before the Launch RNS).

Could Heights have sold and/or forward sold 8.69m shares? They received 6.66m shares in January and it seems incredulous that they would sell the equivalent of what they've recently had plus more at such a low price, unless they feared (at the end of February) that there would be a complete share price collapse of course. Possible, but I think unlikely.

In any case, sell-buy scenarios require a single buyer and who could that be? As there was a falling share price and panic selling by weak hands and gleeful buying by PIs and traders, I don't think it was a transfer (a mediated, matched sell and buy. )

That just leaves two buys (hooray!)

The transactions took place just before 14:20 but were reported after close of business. That and the £:$ conversion strongly indicates a US organization (sic). The trades would have been worked buys over the past (...checks the Avacta chart...) six market days since the share price dropped from 40p. ...Anyone can start a rumour that there's going to be a placing, whether based on broker activity or pulled out of thin air. How fortunate for the buyer.

I think that explains what happened, but what do I know - I'm willing to be educated on this. But if that is indeed the case, we should know shortly.

He's a cuddly soul isn't he.

And the timing? Just a few minutes before the US stockmarket officially opens at 9:30 so, if not a coordinated event with Avacta, they would have had a couple of hours to digest the news, discuss, make their decision and move.

Interesting line of thought. The cost in Sterling and the number of shares are rather random so a round number cost in another currency definitely makes sense.

How about this though?! £3,259,328 is also very near to US$4.2m, $8.4m for the two. Could be a pharma company or an institutional investor brought onboard by our new co-broker (or Peel Hunt).

Sp🤞 for a juicy RNS on Monday or, failing that, just that rare Avacta event, a TR1, shortly.

Bella, where do you get 11.2m from?

The two trades in question, in chronology, are:

14:42:36 - spread 37/38.... 37.68p (buy)

......

14:30:22 - spread 37/38.... 37.388p (sell)

14:19:07 - spread 37/38.... 37.50p, 8,691,541 shares, £3.26m

14:18:36 - spread 37/38.... 37.50p, 8,691,541 shares, £3.26m

14:13:55 - spread 37/38.... 37.388p (sell)

......

13:55:12 - spread 37/38.... 37.73p (buy)

Total shares in those two trades were 17.383m. However, with the two trades being so close together and at exactly the same number of shares and same price, could this be a transfer of shares via two trades?

2 x £3.26m

Where's that guy who claimed that Avacta shares were worth -£309 because the company didn 't have a revenue stream? I miss his sense of humour.

LlamaFarmer wrote: "As soon as theyve burnt though that £12m they'll need to place again."

Well the sale value of Launch is actually £12.9m, so I already see that you are not arguing in good faith.

So... You are assuming there will be no other income during the next 12 months until the auditors go to work on Avacta's finances?

You think they won't sell Coris, or maybe they'll just give it away? And you are assuming no milestone payments? That I think is fair as Noah was still building his ark when the last one came in. I'm not aware of Avacta ever receiving any grants, but there's always a first time...

And you think there won't be compelling data from the AVA6000 Phase 1b trial that will lead to some kind of licence deal or even takeover offer? As a matter of interest, as you say you've been following Avacta so closely, when do you think decisive data, one way or the other, from the Phase 1b trial will come through for Big Pharma to make that decision on?

Why fret over intraday or even day-to-day SP changes?

What happened today are that Avacta is now a going concern for the next 12 months and Phase 1b has started with patients already being treated. Before the 12 months are up there will be clear Phase 1b evidence, hopefully compelling, that AVA6000 is efficacious in up to three indications and, if that is so, there will be a scramble to sign licence deals. Add in potential new data released at conference about AVA6103 and Big Pharma will be gagging for it.

Corrections incoming...

"Am I right in thinking many of the phase 1 patients did not have cancer where dox would have been used ?" - The patients in the initial cohorts were chosen for proof of concept - to show that AVA6000 was safe (didn't kill them) and tolerable (had manageable side effects) - and for that purpose the cancers chosen were those believed to be high in FAP, irrespective of whether doc+xorubicin was expected to effective. The patients with cancers that weren't expected to be affected by AVA6000 (because the cancers weren't traditionally treatable with doxorubicin) joined the trial out of altruism, but probably also hoping for a miracle. Later cohorts, once proof of concept had been achieved, focussed on cancers treatable by doxorubicin.

"surely they could have fought for a trail design where they could get better more exciting results." - These were end-of-life terminally ill patients who had exhausted all lines of treatment for their cancers. Yes, they could have hung on for a different trial but would another trial have been any better for them? They were acting altruistically and no doubt hoping for a miracle. And miracles did happen. How do YOU define 'exciting results'?

"the time scale here seems to be getting further away from my initial understanding." - you can blame Alan's false representation of the process for that.

"I don't see the limited results this morning as significant enough to get the value up or to get big investors who will want to wait for far more feedback before being rushed here." - Today is merely a step along the way. Good data from Phase 1b plus further news about AVA6301 will attract big investors, be they institutions or Big Pharma. It is a long process, trod by many small biopharma companies before Avacta. Have patience.

"They really would have been better giving away a big chunk of the science here to get someone running it who knows what they are doing." - The plan is to licence/sell the science/company, not to give it away. Have patience.

What does this mean? 🤔

Why is that sensitive information? Please explain.

You don't do yourself any favours with your petty wind-ups. No wonder you are detested.