Member Info for BuenaVista

AVA3996 was lauded by Alan as being tumour-agnostic (as long as there is FAP present to cleave off the warhead). I suppose in that sense AVA6000 is as well, just a lot less effective on the efficacy-toxicity scale. However, as exatecan is also tumour-agnostic, AVA3996 became redundant; not even worthy of licensing out as the warhead is a new chemical entity, unlike doxorubicin in AVA6000 and exatecan in AVA6103, and no match for exatecan. That rather begs the question of whether anything would be significantly better than exatecan as a pre|CISION warhead. There may be better exatecan analogues (AVA6103s) of course, but that would be totally within the scope of Avacta's IP.

I don't see the resource spent on AVA3996, which was handed to Avacta on a plate along with AVA6000, as a great waste of effort as there were processes to go through for AVA6000 durng that time, for AVA3996 proof of concept in animals, and for launching Avacta's own series of research compounds and all the drug design effort that went into that. Besides, the bashers were never saying AVA3996 was a waste of effort at the time were they, so they should have nothing to say about it now.

I'll settle for a souped-up Ford. Speed!

https://youtu.be/_c92DRtbz5E?si=S78pNmHAVeusGhd4&t=53

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7noIAz1G5c&t=12s

"There was a 2.8M shares purchase at 16:46pm yesterday in addition to the entries for 2.8M that cancelled each other at 16:55pm."

I don't see that in yesterday's LSE trades data or any of the three volume charts I looked at.

Yes it was reversed but who, what and why would someone do that? What does it mean? 2.8m shares for £1m isn't in the usual range for Avacta shares. Someone traded the wrong company's stock or what?

Speaking of anything even vaguely related to cancer, what's happened to our resident trading guru, HurstBot, these past few weeks? If it's a refit then there must surely be a hold-up in the supply chain?

Https://12ft.io/

Avacta's link with MD Anderson is going to be very useful and hopefully very important.

Credit to avctIPmatters for uncovering this: https://cancerfocusfund.com/

And to goldenpaddy17 for this: https://www.mdanderson.org/cancermoonshots.html

One small biopharma company that both the above are working with is Eisbach Bio GmbH:

https://www.mdanderson.org/newsroom/md-anderson-eisbach-bio-collaborate-develop-epigenetic-targeted-therapies.h00-159536589.html and https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2024/03/21/2850079/0/en/Eisbach-and-Cancer-Focus-Fund-Announce-4-5-Million-Investment-to-Support-First-in-Human-Phase-1-2-Trial-of-EIS-12656-for-Refractory-Advanced-Solid-Tumors.html

"EIS-12656, the lead oncology program at Eisbach, is a first-in-class allosteric small molecule inhibitor targeting the PARP-activated chromatin remodeling helicase ALC1 (also known as CHD1L). The cancer-relevant genome reorganization induced by PARP activation is critically dependent on ALC1 activity. Genetic data have revealed that disruption of this ALC1 activity greatly potentiates PARP inhibitors and produces synthetic lethality in BRCA gene mutations. EIS-12656 was developed by exploiting Eisbach’s ALLOS drug discovery platform that recapitulates the selective, unique, and physiological activation mechanism of its target enzymes in the laboratory. Preclinical data showed that EIS-12656 disrupted cancer cell growth by interfering with the DNA damage and repair (DDR) mechanisms of cancer cells while exhibiting a markedly superior toxicity profile in comparison with currently available therapies targeting DDR pathways. With its first-in-kind, allosteric inhibitory mechanism and superior toxicity profile, EIS-12656 may enable novel monotherapy applications and powerful combination therapies."

Timothy A. Yap of MD Anderson is named as the Principal Investigator for that trial. Our MD Anderson contact is yet to be named.

The AVA6000 Phase 1b indications are the three Avacta has talked about and will fund plus, I believe, others that could attract development partners when the trial data starts coming out. Avacta will still need a partner to take the TNBC indication into Phase 2.

AVA6103 will be a completely different molecule so we'll have to go through full trials. Hopefully the regulatory authorities will take on board the animal data and allow a high starting dose in Phase 1a and at an optimal dosing frequency. Those two improvements on the way AVA6000 was progressed should vastly speed up future early clinical development.

🤣🤣🤣 You're not a serious person eggy 🥱

Next for what?

Is that your conclusionn after your 'extensive research' of thr history of the company? 🤣🤣🤣 F in idiot 🥱

Maybe. Keep watching.

I've thought long and hard about it and have come to the conclusion that I WILL forgive you for omitting that first 'l'. Just don't do it again, eh? gmc

A text-off between TW disciples and MM disciples would be fascinatingly ...dull 🥱😴 The O2 arena would be a good venue. Better than any of that modern so-called music.🥱🥱😴😴

"Now five indications in phase 1b." Eh? What's that about?

"We will find out soon the identity of the Avacta BP sugar daddy." Eh? What's the evidence for that?

As regards the 'everlasting gobstopper' (surprised they allowed those in the Good Ol' US of A), here's the text from that item:

"The only requirement is that the new product must contain the same active moiety and be intended for the same orphan use as the drug that received the original designation."

To my mind that just means different formulations of the same drug for the same disease(s) - slow release, delayed release, controlled release, liposomes, intravenous, intramuscular, suppository, pessary, inhaler, transdermal, buccal etc, etc (if there are any more routes of administration... suggestions?)

As regards pre|CISION, it's dipeptide precludes any route that involves acid digestion and iv (intravenous) is the obviously the most direct and reliable route of administration.

The MD Anderson Cancer Center is a well recognised centre of expertise.

🥱😴

Good point gmcc.

...When you're confident enough about funding to put an extra patient in one of the cohorts.

Great news!

So 1st or 2nd line treatment for the HGSTS and SGC cohorts and 1st, 2nd or 3rd line treatment for TNBC.

All patientsl will be anthracyclin naïve so there'll be no interference in the AVA6000 efficacy from prior anthracyclin treatment.

Lovely jubbly.

As regards funding, either the sale of Dx is imminent or a FDA Orphan Drug trial grant is in the offing. Or both.

Eggy taking a break whilst TW thinks up some talking points for it?