Member Info for BuenaVista

Wyndrum ...not a serious person.

I think he just gets frustrated having to wait for the tea and biscuits to come round. They should really take his ZX away.

Professor Eggy!😂😂😂 Professor of Circus Amusements.🤡

Eggy, Wyn & Derek, the 3 'Professors'.

😂😂😂

WHAT?!!!! You mean Eggy was lying (again)?????

"CC did kind of say as much last week" - full quote please, or you are talking through your nether region.

One of the clinicians - can't remember who - said that whilst the doxorubicin course is 6 cycles, several patients can't take more than 2 before they quit because they feel so rotten. Anyone who has experienced nausea from alcohol, tummy bug or sea sickness will know the feeling - "I'd rather die." So, as well as fewer and less severe side effects, one can also add improved compliance to the AVA6000 case as well as the obvious longer duration of treatment.

The fact is, no one knows how effective a long course of doxorubicin in the treatment setting would be because the maximum up until now has only been 6 cycles/18 weeks.

You'd think that with a name that carried the country's name, DB would be a well respected, reputable company but it is absoutely not to be trusted (see their 1.5 Trustpilot score), including the brokerage arm: their downgrade of Avacta to a sell rating last year was PURE market manipulation to create a low entry point.

🍿

🥱😴

No more please

"Now you want to compare the share price of ROQ since they IPO'd!!" [in March 2021].

Bottmzup wrote in OP: "Stand back and look at the share price chart over the last 5 years."

🙄🤷🏼‍♂️

@Bottmzup, on Roquefort Therapeutics, a comparison of share prices with Avacta shows that over the last 6 months to the last 3 years, the Avacta share price has performed better. The 5 year comparison doesn't make sense as Roquefort IPO'ed in March 2021.

Follow https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/r/roquefort-therapeutics-plc-ord-gbp0.01/share-charts link and add AVCT as comparison.

Additionally, re: "Roquefort Therapeutics' portfolio consists of five novel patent-protected pre-clinical anti-cancer and immunology assets", well AVA6000, AVA6103 and AVA7100 are all 'anti-cancer assets', so what's so special about Roquefort's anti-cancer assets?

@Bottmzup, so basically you can't name any of the new tech, their likelihoods of success nor timescales to market.

There's no point trying to put the onus of knowing this back on me when it's you that is claiming it! You can't make a broad bland statement and then disappear. That's not how making your case in an argument works. Back your statement up if, after your research, you truly believe it.

@Bottmzup, who wrote "Amidst these endless phased trials and financial woes, the rest of the world are coming up with all kinds of new tech solutions for actually beating cancers, putting the whole offering that AVCT could eventually come up with at a commercial level, as a bit part player. ... while the rest of the world moves on with new technology, developments and inventions...with AI etc!"

What are these new technologies? Would you care to name them, with their likelihoods of success and timescales to market? I'd be very interested to hear you thoughts on why pharma (and other?) companies are investing in them and not in old tech like ADCs.

The news story is 'a therapy is being made available on the NHS in England in a world first'. The patient's story is the human angle. We don't have a news story yet.

This GSK experience exemplifies the importance of getting the dosing regimen right as early as possible in treatment naive patients, something that Avacta is doing, as much as it is possible to do (there are competing TNBC treatments):

Phase 1b: patients with histological or cytological confirmation of a locally advanced (unresectable) and/or metastatic tumour of one of the following types:

1. High grade soft tissue sarcoma: histologically proven locally advanced or metastatic, unresectable progressive or recurrent DDLS or UPS who have received 0 or 1 prior lines of therapy in the locally advanced or metastatic setting.

2. SGC: Locally advanced or metastatic salivary gland confirmed by histopathology that cannot be completely resected by surgery who have received 0 or 1 prior lines of therapy in the locally advanced or metastatic setting. In addition, patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma subtypes must not have received prior cytotoxic therapy for locally advanced or metastatic disease. Adenoid cystic carcinoma subtype to be capped at 15 patients (assuming cohort of approximately 30 patients).

3. TNBC: Locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer confirmed by histopathology who have received up to 2 lines of prior therapy in the locally advanced or metastatic setting. BRCA with PD-L1 negative.

Idiot

Also from the BBC article: "The infusion takes around half an hour. Paul is having one every two months, while others have it every three weeks as research continues to work out which plan gives the best results."

This describes DREAMM-14, the latest in teh DREAMM series of trials: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05064358?term=belantamab%20mafodotin%20dreamm&rank=1

"Brief Summary

"This study aims to evaluate alternative dosing regimens of single-agent belantamab mafodotin in participants with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) to determine if an improved overall benefit/risk profile can be achieved by modifying the belantamab mafodotin dose, schedule, or both."

So GSK are doing - or had to go back and redo - their optimal dose & schedule finding at the END of the clinical development process... A note to the unwary: Avacta spent a lot of time doing this with a lot fewer patients at the BEGINNING, in Phase 1a of the AVA6000 clincal development process.

Specifically, the DREAMM-3 trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04162210?term=belantamab%20mafodotin%20dreamm&rank=9

Good news for those with myeloma but this is yet another ADC, with the usual ADC issues...

"Antibody drug conjugates are being developed for a range of cancers. The limitation is being able to design an antibody that can target the cancer alone. There is one that can target some types of breast cancer. Research is already taking place on stomach and bowel cancer."

Another limitation being the chemo being cleaved off elsewhere in the body, causing off-target toxicity.

- - - - - - -

Belantamab mafodotin integrates an afucosylated monoclonal antibody and monomethyl auristatin F (MMAF) as its cytotoxic agent. It induces apoptosis in MM cells by disrupting microtubule formation and interfering with important signaling pathways.

- - - - - - -

And, interestingly, based on reports dating from November 2022:

AI Overview

Belantamab mafodotin (Blenrep) has been withdrawn from the market in the US, Europe, and the UK, primarily due to concerns about its effectiveness in treating multiple myeloma. Specifically, a confirmatory trial (DREAMM-3) did not demonstrate a significant increase in progression-free survival compared to standard treatment.

Elaboration:

US Withdrawal:

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) withdrew belantamab mafodotin's accelerated approval based on the results of the DREAMM-3 trial, which did not meet the requirements of the FDA's accelerated approval regulations.

European Withdrawal:

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommended and the European Commission decided not to renew the conditional marketing authorization for Blenrep in the EU, citing that the benefits no longer outweighed the risks.

UK Withdrawal:

Similarly, the UK's marketing authorization for Blenrep was revoked, following the same concerns about efficacy and the non-renewal in the EU.

DREAMM-3 Trial:

The DREAMM-3 trial compared belantamab mafodotin to pomalidomide plus dexamethasone. While the trial found that belantamab mafodotin had a longer median progression-free survival (11.2 months vs. 7 months), it did not demonstrate superiority over the standard treatment, leading to its withdrawal.

Side Effects:

While the safety and tolerability profile of belantamab mafodotin was consistent with the established safety profile, with no new safety concerns, the decision to withdraw it was primarily based on the lack of efficacy in the DREAMM-3 trial.

Ongoing Trials:

Despite the withdrawals, research into belantamab mafodotin continues, with ongoing trials exploring its use in combination with other therapies for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

- - - - - - -

The DREAMM trials: https://clinicaltrials.gov/search?term=belantamab%20mafodotin%20dreamm