Member Info for CTSFO

Oops, just realised I’ve plagiarised Thorn. Sorry!

Morning Ice, the small trial of fortnightly dosing makes some sense to me. Marking sure they get the Phase 2 trial design absolutely correct is worth a small delay. The potential to optimise safety and efficacy now will pay off in the long term. But agree it does frustrate the timeline.

Morning Bella, totally agree. We must remember this is a selected, FAP level proven, group of patients. Not the more generalised end stage cancer patients the present trials have been performed in. Please excuse the bluntness, not meant to demean the sufferers are helping us by taking part in the trials.

Agree with comments about so much being known about plain and simple doxorubicin. This, together with Orphan Drug Status, has got to make the path to a product license a relatively quicker process. Still safe, the trials will need to be done, but hopefully more straightforward.

It’s worth looking at the support the FDA and EMA give to Orphan Drug development. It’s reassuring.

Novartis have a drug development portfolio interest in FAP / FAPI for diagnosis and treatment. A cheeky google search shows the potential for FAP related Pharma.

https://www.novartis.com/news/media-releases/novartis-expands-targeted-radioligand-therapy-pipeline-license-compounds-targeting-fibroblast-activation-protein-fap

This 2020 overview of FAP in health and cancer is interesting:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7487063/

Good post B2HS2L. Links nicely with this:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37333052/

Looking at FAP levels in sarcomas in 2023.

Worth a read. People have had enough of side effects. Patients and doctors are requesting minimum effective dose, not maximum tolerated dose. If only there was a delivery platform that enabled this. Oh…

https://dailyprogress.com/news/nation-world/business/health-care/cancer-treatment-drugs-fda-doses-lung-breast/article_4b5b24b8-21b2-5630-953e-ad837ea32f9c.html

Poor 💩🦷W⚓️. No one listened. The short position has been closed.

Those that can do, those that can’t become hedge fund managers (failed), pizza restaurant owners (failed), journalist (failed), share tipsters (fai… you get the idea.

Thorn, very fair comment. Unfortunately so true. I should have focused on the global reduction in drug toxicity.

May I add / change my post? Normal doxorubicin can be given into a fast flowing drip = large vein. But it can cause significant tissue damage if the drug leaves the vein (extravasates). This can lead to plastic surgery intervention. AVA 6000 shouldn’t show this degree of toxicity. Sorry for any potential to mislead with the post re central lines.

https://www.termedia.pl/Case-report-Extravasation-of-doxorubicin-a-dreaded-complication-of-therapy,77,22239,1,1.html

SORRY: I retract it.

“ Administer diluted Doxorubicin Hydrochloride Injection or diluted reconstituted Doxorubicin Hydrochloride for Injection as an intravenous injection through a central intravenous line or a secure and free-flowing peripheral venous line containing 0.9% Sodium Chloride Injection, USP, 0.45% Sodium Chloride Injection, USP, ...”

From Pfizer.

“ Doxorubicin is given: by injection into a vein (intravenously) through a fine tube (cannula) placed into the vein in your arm. through a central line (Hickman / Portacath), which is inserted under the skin into a vein near the collarbone, or into a PICC line which is inserted into a vein in the crook of your arm.”

Ref to follow.

B2HS2L. Excellent post. Worth adding that AVA6000 is given by a simple drip in the back of the hand. Normal doxorubicin HAS to be given by a central line. This was confirmed following a personal message to one of Avacta’s team on LinkedIn. Sorry I can’t prove this. This adds to the paradigm shift. It’s easier, cheaper, and most importantly safer for the patient and healthcare team.

Ice, couldn’t agree more. With the massive amount of proven data about ‘normal doxorubicin’, we’ll be able to establish trends away from this very quickly in the ongoing and upcoming trials. It’s going to be interesting to see how Avacta have proven the tumour FAP levels prior to treatment, and then the response seen in the tumour. This is going to take more time. But time very well spent. We’re closer to FAP testing being part of the standard of care in oncology.

Morning Ice, I’m going argue this point.. “ The efficacy of Dox was never the issue, we know it kills cancer, it was always about the safety and tolerability at very high levels.”

Doxorubicin has cancer killing properties, obviously, but isn’t brilliant. The Multi Drug Resistance seen affects so many patients. I think and hope part of the paradigm shift we’ll see is enhanced cancer killing because of the supra normal cellular levels we’ll see in FAP rich tumours. So my argument is this is as much to do with enhanced efficacy as it is with safety. Win win.

This site is showing 278,899 Avacta shares held short. Time to start buying at this bargain sp. For us and to short squeeze the William Ankers.

https://fintel.io/ss/us/avctf

Just a reminder. Spread the love and all that.

Here’s an old (1999) but I think very relevant piece of research. It shows the gradient of Doxorubicin concentration occurring in breast cancer cells, from the periphery to the centre of the tumour.

We know Multi Drug Resistance is a therapeutic issue for Doxorubicin, this might help explain why. The sub therapeutic dose allows the selection and proliferation of drug resistant cells.

AVA6000 may well allow such an overwhelming delivery of doxorubicin, even if a gradient exists those cells in the centre receive a significant / effective dose of chemotherapy.

Worth thinking about?

https://aacrjournals.org/clincancerres/article/5/7/1703/287594/Doxorubicin-Gradients-in-Human-Breast-Cancer

“ Do the fudsters think there is a queue of people waiting to go on trial? Do they think we can just kidnap a tramp and graft STS like we would with a mouse. ? No, we need a very specific first line patient and this could take time to find. It is not a delay and saying nothing about it is not poor communication.”

Exactly right. A highly selected, biopsy proven to be FAP rich, group of patients.

Just checked through RNSs and the Company’s publications. Avacta’s financial year runs 1st Jan to 31st December. Its audited accounts for year ending 31st Dec 2022 were released late April 2023. We can expect something similar this year. IF they had £26,000,000 free cash on 31st December 2023 and the annual burn rate of £17,000,000 continues then the company isn’t short of money this year. But I’m not sure if the audited account statement re a going concern is from the date the accounts fall due, or from the date they are signed off by the auditors. They might be sailing close to the wind if the going concern is from April 2024 to April 2025.