Member Info for BuenaVista

Trendz, you say you have a very small short on AVCT. I think you need to increase it massively if there is a killing to be made here.

Really, the quality of FUD nowadays is embarrassing.

thank you sandy.

i totally gree that the comms are not good enough. imho they are sp****, insincere (in that 'no material information' is never true) and ambiguous.

It's been sold. RNS tomorrow.

Doesn't mean they have started dosing, otherwise they would have said "we have now started dosing".

Rambo, and others... I missed the information that AS's latest view is to RNS once the 3rd patient In a cohort has been dosed.

Which thread was this reported in please?

The Leeds/Tufts mistake I could put down to confusion in the moment - depends whether Gervais Williams regularly gets that wrong, but the Phase 1b was a bad mistake. He is manager or joint manager of at least one OEIC and two investment trusts each investing in around 130 different shares, athough there will be overlap, and can't realistically be expected to hold all information about all of them in his head but he would have known which companies he would be talking about and should have been primed on the status of them all.

But sujood is dyslexic so could have meant anything.

If Avacta don't get a measles diagnostic on the market by Friday I will be very, very disappointed.😔

I'm not aware of anything being officially said about where she will be based but I think it would make sense to be in the US if there are close dealings with the FDA as it's always best to hold meetings in person plus there are the trial sites in New York and Seattle to visit to see what's going on for herself.

All this is within the current paradigm of R&D being very much pulled by the clinical outcomes rather than pushed by internal drug discovery possibilities.

I can understand why CC heads up clinical development - she is a medical doctor, is American living in America and is very familiar with the work practices there.

It's less clear why she is also heading all the preclinical research and development and one can speculate on the reason but having one person in charge of the whole strategy from drug discovery through to drug registration does mean that the process can be streamlined and leaves AS more time to work with SB on business development.

Well there are two parts to C7:

1 - Was MTD found according to the 3+3 protocol? - No...unless the RNS was really saying "A maximum tolerated dose has not been reached *YET* in the three-weekly dose escalation study...". And, frankly, Avacta's RNS's are so full of omissions and ambiguity that I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the case.

2 - What efficacy was shown in the continued dosing? - Surely an open-ended study until AVA6000 stops being given to the last patient, so when will that be?

You mean 93.7p of course, whic his the same as my calculation.

What C7 results are you expecting? It has already been stated (RNS of 13 Dec) that no MTD was found: "A maximum tolerated dose has not been reached in the three-weekly dose escalation study...".

Was AVA032 ever listed on the Pipeline page? If you know it was, please post the link. I could never find it listed in the Internet Archive so I believe it was never listed and instead was only included under AVA028 as one of the 'ImmunoCytokines' (plural).

The Scottish accent was not the problem for me, it was the enunication.

I trust what the company has decided to do. CC's presentation in December was impressive - clear, forceful and technically on top of the subject matter with industry-standard terms, even if I did find some of those terms rather confusing to follow.

I have to say that I found FMcL difficult to listen to in purely practical terms as her voice is soft and modulates into almost inaudible, along with the whistling in some badly mic'ed presentations.

Not really anything to respond to as she was already in place.

How big is the sales team? You know, in comparison to the number of oncologists in the US?

Yes, is the slow uptake due to poorly performing tests or lack of promotion of the tests. There's nothing to suggest the tests perform poorly, quite the reverse. Lack of awareness and the tendency to stick with the tried and trusted - OK, maybe not quite so much trusted but undoubtedly what's already known and familiar (a habit) - are definitely hurdles to be overcome. Partnership with a company that can provide a large sales force primed with the feedback from the prescribing oncologists should have a very positive effect on sales.

"These are still very early days in the US but leading indicators are positive with 144 tests processed with reimbursement available and invoiced under the unique CPT code from 1st January 2024" does NOT mean 144 tests since 1 Jan as the wording is ambiguous and could equally be interpreted as two separate events:

These are still very early days in the US but leading indicators are positive with 144 tests processed and reimbursement available and invoiced under the unique CPT code from 1st January 2024.