We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
It's hard to believe DocDan and Mani didn't read the AGM report already, but here we are nonetheless. Happy reading both.
Soonbetime,
Everything is relative. You can give a patient a cheap horse pill costing peanuts and he can battle and ultimately die from treatment inefficacy over 4 days, all the while requiring the 24/7 care of a dozen rotating critical illness staff, a bed costing, for example, £600 per 24 hour period not unheard of and probably on the cheap side!), not to mention the economic and human toll this causes. I would say that is a very "expensive" and incredibly wasteful strategy in public health practice. Far better to have a drug deemed "expensive" by some (compared to the £5 horse pills) which *actually works*, and gets that patient out of a Critical Care unit, back on a ward, and home as soon as possible. What we know of possible pricing of the drug (which has not been finalised) actually puts it as less expensive than some stand-alone Covid treatments. We know this, it has been analysed and debated here previously. The cost / benefit savings in the hospital setting are very clear. But they have to be examined in the CONTEXT of where and how the drug will be used.
Chin up Doc, it could still be a blockbuster. Who's to say?
Professor Stephen Holgate is one of the authors of the The MRC Framework for the
Development, Design and Analysis of Stratified Medicine Research, overseen by the M4SM Steering Group, which, coincidentally, is also chaired by Professor Stephen Holgate. Busy guy.
So yes, Professor Stephen Holgate is very much involved in the framework Synairgen are using to develop SNG001. Had you othered to read the AGM Report, you'd know that. Go read it.
SH has worked on clean air technology for years - that's why Dyson, they are the manufacturers that enable the monitoring. He's spent a lifetime fighting to ensure no more kids die needlessly of pollution and mould-exacerbated asthma. Shame on you Mani.
The link to Top MD has already been established and discussed, it's not new. They attended the Synairgen AGM in 2022 I believe? I imagine their findings are relevant to Synairgen, but so could those of other companies that are undertaking similar research and producing similar datasets. Top MD is not the only one, although it is probably closest geographically...
And if they are using AI applications in the clinical trials, that will no doubt turbo-charge evidence generation too. Precision medicine (in which AI plays a key role) seems to very much be a strong theme in the first dozen or so pages of the Synairgen 2023 AGM presentation document issued in June. I imagine that was very much by design, and not by accident.
Artful.
It must be Sunday evening ; the 4 uninvested horsemen of the Apocolypse are back to taunt us with their dastardly tales of woe.
In other news, I have it on good authority that RM is indeed well regarded in Respiro BP circles. ...Still waters runneth deep, etc.
Happy Monday all.
You have a lot to learn my dear Prof. Luckily time is on your side.
TFG have hedged their way into a nice comfortable position here. So comfortable, that they may soon no longer require your posting services Costas. Gulp.
..Or maybe you don't need to call them Costas, just lean across the desk with the Olivetti, and have a quiet word. There's a good chap.
TFG don't seem to know it. No action taken. Nada, Not a whimper from them. Strange for such a huge investor holding just shy of 30%, all that potential for change, yet utter silence. You should call them, make them aware their investment "is in the gutter". I'm sure they'd appreciate starting the week with a good laugh.
Some things are blessings in disguise.
What point is a fully paid trial when it takes as long as Strive to release data? Easily forgotten. I'd rather watch treacle evaporate than go through that again. If we are running studies in the US I would hope it's in collaboration with a BP (or little P), where more control is retained. But who knows...
Thanks Jint.
Could one be in the US and one here? I know there are other reasons for them starting simultaneously and finishing at different times. So just asking the question really, as a logical answer might be because there are 2 regulator processes involved so timeframes will differ. Granted that the answer could be simpler; e.g. different trial indications/targets/designs, or site availability, etc ...
JAxe,
Cupid’s arrows might be sharp,
But my love for you is off the (share price) chart.
Happy Valentine's day
x x x
Here's another view then; your guesstimate is wildly over-stated. Remember the company have said they are doing "small, focussed" stratified studies, not more 'Sprinter trials'. So perhaps you have based your figs on incorrect assumptions.
Mani has purposefully omitted the other significant changes mentioned on page 9 pf the Financial Report to make the financials look weaker. In the Statement of Financial Position, we now have current tax receivable of £2.4 million, and trade and other payables decreased to £3.3 million (as trade payables reduced from £4.2 million to £0.5 million in line with the reduction in the level of operating expenditure).
Mani has not included these changes in her wild guesstimate. Only an idiot, etc....