Member Info for Doc.Daneeka

Fruits. We'll see soon enough. You've been wrong on everything for so long that you won't mind another little dent. If the company tells you - a matter of weeks before the trials are to be announced - that it will use a viral clearance test to identify patients, I'd be inclined to believe them.

"for now" is what I said. You say "in due course"

"Using in-vitro testing, SNG001 has shown great promise as being a potential viral agnostic therapeutic. Being a potentially viral agnostic really opens the target market, hence the viability of different approaches. Longer term and making good use of recent assay development showing if an individual is deficient in IFN Beta, there may be a huge market as prophylactic (as mentioned by Sir Stephen at the 2023 AGM). "

Last year's hope - replaced in July of this year with the admission that they are no longer attempting to trial as a multi-viral drug (except in MV patients) and have no means or ambition for anything other than MV at this time. The only assay they plan to use in MV is the one which will measure viral clearance. All the bunkum about modern diagnostic tools has come to nothing for now - although it's to be hoped C-labs Auto-ab for Ifns work might yield a test for a P3.

There is zero chance of anyone supporting a larger multi-viral trial, least of all BARDA who had the evidence of ACTIV2 and could not find a way forward for the drug in the outpatient arena and never considered it for inpatients.

Keep following PMJH though and he'll keep your hopes up Bob

No question about it; this will be a very important drug for critical care use in MVP, if it is proven to work in the identified group.

exactly Fruits. Concentrate on this alone. Everything else is part of the old, failed narrative that was pumped relentlessly in the post-Sprinter hiatus. Pumped irresponsibly on here - and pumped even harder by the company . Promising a multi-viral future based on absolutely nothing, and then admitting 6 months later that the data didn't support further efforts.

Typo there - was going to cite the US response to the recent bird flu in the US - where the FDA could not adequately test the at-risk population because of individual state control of the processes. It fizzled out - fortunately - but it was a very early test of the post pandemic world, and it demonstrated that nothing had been learned.

"Really. Really! Government doesn’t take the time (so precious a commodity in a pandemic) and effort (you don’t want to look back and be judged stupidly penny pinching…again) to actually properly test through P3. No serious government, a couple of years out from the pandemic would take this “in the drawer” approach. "

We've already seen plenty of evidence that Govt's all over the world have returned to their previous relaxed and oblivious state. They don't do future planning for anything, let alone healthcare. And they will remain slow and ineffective in dealing with outbreaks ( just look at the Amazing to imagine so soon after a hundred year event that cost the global economy $82 trillion, but true nontheless. PP costs too much and wins no votes, and therefore "Pandemic preparedness" is an empty slogan. World govts will remain reliant on Big Pharma - and in particular the speed with which mRNA vaccines can be made, tested and delivered. As well as monoclonals and the huge leaps forward targeted therapeutics such as protease inhibibitors.

But if all this is incorrect, and if someone really is looking at SNG001 and thinking it could be an important drug - what trial exactly would you like the Government to sponsor Bob ? Are you still interested in COPD ? Or prophyllactic use ? Or further testing as a first use hospital drug ?

Nah - don't waste your time on that Bob. It was pumped byv PMJH and the 3 Stooges before the FY results made it clear that all those escape routes had been permanently sealed. Trust SS's response to your question. There is no chance of a Govt sponsored trial or any other form of sponsorship. If we're lucky they'll help with trialing locations for the MV P2.

Bob " I know I’ve previously suggested that the government(s) is involved in whatever is going on but to do the successful in-vitro test, present the results at a conference and then stop, when they really need to be showing much greater preparedness than previous regimes, beggars belief! "

The Porton Down ivs were a mystery which excited most on the board a little (in the absence of any other news) , and the usual suspects,greatly. The mystery has now been resolved and the answer given to you by SS,and confirmed by RM tallies exactly with Synairgen's statement in the full year results - which was that the company

"Recognised that opportunities for potential future assessment of SNG001 in platform trials and/or academic trials may materialise in the event of an emerging virus threat "

Hopefully, HMRA now has SNG001 filed away in the drawer marked " Ground Zero killer respiratory virus - first line response " This drawer to be opened only in the event of deadly outbreak of an entirely novel virus ( probably another coronavirus ) which evades all of the C19 vaxes and therapeutics. In such a situation SNG might be expected to have an efficacy approaching that demonstrated in SG016, after a small deduction for cytokine damping therapeutics - such as Dexa - which would still work. For a period SNG001 could be the finger in the dyke - holding back the flood until new vaxes and therapeutics could be readied.

If this really is the truth of the current situation then there's nothing further to be done with the drug unless this horrifying scenario ever played out. Except, of course, for the work the company hopes to do with MV patients.

Ah isn't that lovely. Someone's fed little Td a morsel to boost his morale and rescue his shattered credibility. Beautiful that. Well done you.

The average CEO remuneration in relation to profit is probably a more useful metric. For AIM Healthcare companies with profits of less than £5m - this average is £200k.

Synairgen made a profit of £1.2m in 2014 - after AZ's upfront payment for SNG001. The only time I can see when the company ever made a profit ( without going back into pre-history. )

Again without dredging back through company accounts - I guess it's likely everyone had a substantial pay and bonus increase after the success of SG016 in 2020. And they've all somehow hung onto them in the years since.

PM and SS have been canned now of course, but RM's cheques keep rolling in because ( just as was the case before the 2023 AGM ) he has been able to announce an imminent trial.

Page 23

https://www.theqca.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AIM_Directors__Remuneration_Report_Final.pdf

Well, they are obviously feeling punchy, if they agreed so readily to the EGM.

Confident they have the backer in place and confident of the trial protocols, even if they are only using an "off the shelf" diagnostic tool for viral clearance, and not the clever modern tools we were once promised. ( Perhaps the Clabs assay will assist with patient id for the P3 ). In any case the design would have been scrutinised in detail before the funding was agreed and whoever is underwriting the trial is clearly happy.

Whether RM is judged any differently, considering the time and money wasted since Sprinter, and the failures of that trial, and the inevitably huge dilution to be revealed at the EGM, is another matter. Clearly - regardless of our particular losses and diappointments, if 20 year + project project ends in any kind of authoristion of SNG in any realm or sphere, RM will take his bow with the others. The small matter of £85m lost and our individual regrets will become a footnote in the long history of the drug. RM and the founders won't be bothered about the company or LTHs at this point, but will gauge their success by the eventual authoristaion of SNG001 - no matter who owns it and takes it over the line.

Ah ok - sorry I'm sure it was covered in the notes and I missed it. What a blinder from Graeme. Of course it's not a difficult one for them really - they'll have a trial to discuss and will presumably release details of the principal backer at the same time. Can't be anyone but TFG can it - throwing good money after the bad money and hoping to turn it all good again. Would prefer it to be a pharma but can't see it now. Unless through a licensing mechanism.

Why did they promise an EGM ? Was it unavoidable ? Is it normal ?

Says the man named Gollumk

Great link Joey - thanks. Here's another study looking at Incontinentia Buttocks

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1774945022555940

Is there any chance that the funding might take a similar form to that seen in the licensing deal struck with Az for Asthma in 2014 ?

" Under the terms of the exclusive licence agreement, AstraZeneca will pay Synairgen a $7.25 million up-front fee and potential development, regulatory and commercial milestones of up to $225 million. In addition, AstraZeneca will pay tiered royalties ranging from single-digit up to mid-teens on commercial sales. AstraZeneca will be responsible for future development costs "

The point of that deal was zero costs or risk for Synairgen - who were not in a position to conduct the trial themselves & retained control of the ip for other viral conditions. AZ would have taken almost all of the profit in that case for Asthma - so there would be much left for investors, except that at its end the company would be strong and solvent and have a product proven in one sphere and therefore much easier to trial again elsewhere. And everyone in the company would keep getting paid. 15% of £1 or £2B still representing a decent return.

They've probably already said enopgh to rule out this kind of deal - but if I was a major investor it's the kind of risk/reward I'd be looking for.

Jint "The segment that PI’s will be offered IMO is not fundamental to the funding position much like the previous 2020 raise split - £80m II’s £7m PI’s " exactly right. They will be saying to PIs " if you want some - you can have some - but we're ok anyway..."

Good question Mani. the SGO16 placing on March 25th 2020 ( 40m shares at 35p to raise £14m ) came a week after the announcement of the imminent start of the trial. The trial announcement on the 18th, told investors that expedited approval had been granted by MHRA and HRA.

Conversely - the placing for SG018 ( Sprinter) - whilst including tantalising glimpses of the protocols and company's short and medium term aims - " 900 patients across c.20 countries.... marketing authorisation applications in 2021 " came on October 14th - whilst the trial protocols came 2 months later and approvals were not confirmed until December 18th.

I doubt it would have made much difference what they said before the Sprinter placing. We were all desperate for shares as were institutional investors really but the point is that when the case was unproven they had to show the trial approvals before the fundraise - when they'd had a successful P2 the money came in regardless of how much they divulged. This time I'm sure we'll be back to the SG016 placing template- with the company having to show that it really does have a trial, from a regulatory standpoint, and also that the main investor is in place. And a detailed description of that primary funding.

Thanks as ever to our front line reporters for another sterling effort. Not much to digest really. We're in suspended animation for the next 6-8 weeks. Possibly less - but just as likely more, given the company's previous lax timekeeping.

The strategy to go for broke with as large a trial as they can find finance for, must be the correct one. But it means the dilution will be colossal.

I agree though that we should reset the clocks and wipe the slate clean when we do get the details - accept finally that our old money is not coming back - and maybe some will find the funds and balls to invest in this new Synairgen at the new launch price.

Thanks Alpha-dog Don't think it has anything to do with Synairgen, for lots of reasons, but it's an incredible and important study.

https://fortune.com/2024/10/11/covid-19-heart-attacks-strokes-death-long-after-infection-new-study-health/