Member Info for CTSFO

An overview of FAP PET/CT hybrid scanning. [18F] has some limitations as well as advantages.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10297281/

But the importantance of FAP / FAPI within oncology is clear. And therefore the AVA platform. Can’t wait for the Q2W trial to be completed, and data published.

Excellent addition to the trial’s data collection.

A useful overview of how [18F] is a better radio marker for PET analysis:

https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/early/2023/06/01/jnumed.123.265486

NO LEAK… NO TEARS… NO THROMBI… NO CALCIFICATION… NO MATERIAL DYSFUNCTION.

That’s what I’m guessing. GLA DYOR BTFSBITL.

Hi DG, it was someone else. So glad they did. They got accused of ramping for their own benefit. Not going anywhere near that argument! But I certainly see the value and potential here. Hope this doesn’t sound too arrogant: I understand the science and potential, and threats / competition in this part of medicine. Hidden Gem.

Good to see you D-G. 👌

Morning all. Jimzi - very helpful posts. IIs certainly want their pound of flesh to fund placings. Been burnt by Avacta, GST, and CPX. It’s not an easy market out there. This share is a hidden gem.

I’d prefer this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK416

I suppose it depends on which way Eli Lilly want to take the development. Certainly plenty of interest in targeted alpha emitter therapy. We don’t know how the research with pre CISION in this field has gone. Maybe potential, maybe absolutely useless. And does what they now know about the pre CISION platform influence their broader interest in Avacta? Plenty of questions and no answers, I’m sorry.

Timster, very important for us. In case anyone doesn’t remember, Avacta had a deal / agreement with Point Pharma re use of the pre CISION platform. Point Pharma are researching the development of targeted alpha emitters. The same as Aktis. Point Pharma have also been taken over by Eli Lilly. Must wonder if Eli Lilly are going to continue the research into pre CISION? Joining the IP of Aktis and Point may well be beneficial for us.

Looks like the traders are doing their thing. Such is life and “it adds liquidity”. I’d rather see them bale down here and be gone before the big news breaks.

Johnhenry, I’ve used ‘a little logic’, because that’s more or less exactly what I said. However the caveats of FAP level of the cancer and MDR remain. There are side affects with AVA6000, but thankfully not the extreme ones seen with plain doxorubicin. No evidence of myocardial dysfunction thus far, and that’s game changing.

Hi Ice, hope all is good. I agree with you. It would be useful and interesting to see a breakdown of each of the patients who have been part of the trials to date. Get shown exactly what they had received prior to AVA6000.

Another thought: we know AS wanted to take AVA6000 all the way to market. I wonder if CC will rethink this, and be amenable to a JV once Q2W data is released? I all agree this drug needs to be approved, licensed, and in patients. It’s a long and expensive process for Avacta to undertake alone.

Touk, we don’t know for a fact that AVA6000 works as well as plain doxorubicin. That trial hasn’t been performed. We do know that AVA6000 delivers doxorubicin to the TME and successful unloads it. Phase 2 / 3 trials will be needed to confirm AVA6000 is as good as plain doxorubicin. Personally I think it will be better in mid and high FAP tumours. The Q2W delivery & increased cell levels should improve its efficiency.

I should have worded that better. Totally agree. Avacta couldn’t have picked a better drug than doxorubicin as a proof of concept. The next warheads will be very interesting.

My post crossed with Timster. I’m not accusing him of ‘statement of fecking obvious’.

Ice, Wyndrum, “ Given the scientific evidence seen so far why would AVA6000 fail scientifically in future studies if targeting tumours sensitive to anthracyclines?”

This is a very important question. Excuse my arrogance in trying to answer it.

This is part of the answer: “ That to me, is where we are at. The fact that we continue to bugger about with dosing regimes is no longer a positive for me, but a sign that its performing but needs to be altered to be commercially effective. The "delay" in 2wd for me again, imo, etc etc, only confirms that it is not as "effective" as many here blythly assume.”

One point of potential failure is doxorubicin will only be released in FAP rich TMEs. We know this, it’s the whole point of the drug. So it won’t work in non FAP rich cancers - statement of the fecking obvious.

The other potential for failure is exactly the same as with plain doxorubicin - the problem of Multi Drug Resistance developing in the cancer. Huge problem with doxorubicin treatment. But… I’m wondering something different to Wyndrum re the Q2W trials. We know standard Q3W dosing for plain doxorubicin is dictated by the need to minimise side effects. Could Q2W allow far greater tumour loading of doxorubicin? Much higher levels within the nucleus and cytoplasm? This then triggers cell death by different pathways, or overwhelms the ability of the cancer cell to remove doxorubicin? I’ve always thought this is what could make AVA6000 ‘special’ beyond the improvement in safety.

Tiger, I wouldn’t be worried at present. I can’t find any mention of 6 months in the December or April RNSs. All we know is that at sometime between December and April the major developer received a sample of Elast Eon. This will need that company to perform its whatever tests it wants. Not sure how long it would take them to make a heart valve from Elast Eon before it could start the bench top trials.

I think the 6 month timeframe comes from this being a minimum suggested length of time for a 200 million cycle bench top test to normally take place. The company might want more data than just this before deciding to proceed.

If there is a negative RNS, the sp will almost definitely drop. The knee jerk to any bad news. But, as already said, it will recover. The heart valve use of Elast Eon is, at present, a small part of what RUA has to offer. But it needs to start making a profit. Fingers crossed that’s going to be announced soon.

Swazers, what do you anticipate going forward?

From the Business Update RNS:

“ Additionally, as announced on 20 December 2023, the Company has successfully entered into a Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) with a global Heart Valve company. The Group's composite material has been delivered and is currently being tested by this partner. The non-calcific nature of Elast-Eon, together with the tear resistance of the novel composite (up to two times improvement over current materials), positions RUA as a leader in developing next-generation alternative leaflet material resistant to Structural Valve Degeneration (SVD). The Company is confident that these results will be of significant interest to other prospective partners and is actively exploring additional potential partnerships.”

‘Actively exploring additional…’ keeps all the majors interested and I hope FOMO kicks in, and someone signs an exclusive deal with RUA.

Ice, a quick thought re “ Once approved they could look at optimising the drug further maybe even doing trials on 1w interval but get the drug approved first.”

Maybe the Q2W is exactly what the FDA and related drug regulatory agencies think is the best way forward? Avacta won’t have changed to this without very good reason. Only Avacta know all of the results so far. Equally, maybe Q3W isn’t as good as they thought it would be, but crunching the data suggests Q2W is the way forward?