The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Oh for sure that is the case. That is the pharmacokinetics aspect of all of this. Some tumours won't express high fap, others are in low blood zones, such as bone cancers. Part of the challenge of oncologists has always been finding the right treatment for a tumour.
They went into the levels in the science day. You should also watch that again. The biopsies were optional, so not all 40 patients gave permission, and others are still alive and receiving treatment! Of those that were obtained, they all demonstrated doxorubicin had been released.
Thorn please go and watch that link between the timeframes outlined. This part of the trial has unequivocally answered the questions:
1. Is AVA6000 safer than straight dox? Yes
2. Is AVA6000 cleaved in the tumour in therapeutic levels? Yes.
3. Does AVA6000 allow for more frequent and extended dosing? Yes, to the latter, in theory yes to the former, but we’ll know the outcome of that in terms of safety and efficacy shortly.
Thanks smee, always worth revisiting that presentation.
Thorn, Touk, Wyndrum - you all seem to have reservations and theories around the mechanism of action of AVA6000, on efficacy, dox concentrations, excretion rates etc. You can get answers to these if you watch from 16-39m, where this is all explained by CC.
Sorry to break this to you Timster, but wyndrum with all his hot air and contradiction still manages to at least provide more worth to this board than yourself. Tell us all, are you paid to pour cold water on every single post, or self-appointed?
We were discussing the link between SP and whether this is a reflection of the science or not. You decided not to answer the points I put to you in last nights post, so perhaps you don't quite grasp them, or you prefer not to.
If it's easier, then just go with the opinion of simple fund managers, their job is to make money after all. Oliver Brown of RC Brown's fund had this wonderfully insightful observation. He said, at 50p the risk reward is in our favour, which is why we found this attractive to participate at this price.
So after all that wyndrum, and btw you have contradicted yourself again on what info the market has access to or not and also now pivoted from “the wrapper might be inhibiting dox” to “ the science works but Avacta might be taken private for 100p”, but the question still remains and I’ll paste it back for your convenience:
so, which is it wyndrum? Is the current share price a vote of confidence by investors in the know, or a bunch of clueless opportunists taking advantage of a 50p placing that should be ignored as far as the validity of ava6000 and precision is concerned?
From the fusion press release:
Fusion Pharmaceuticals Inc. (NASDAQ:FUSN), a clinical-stage oncology company focused on developing next-generation radiopharmaceuticals as precision medicines, today announced the presentation of preclinical data that provide further support of its clinical stage FPI-2059, a neurotensin receptor 1 (NTSR1) targeted alpha therapy (TAT), and additional preclinical development programs. The Company presented these data in three poster presentations at the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting.
i'm not trying to shut down alternative scenarios (although the wrapper inhibiting dox is a bit a far fetched), i was just pointing out that your definition of the market and what it represents is inconsistent, which actually sums up your use of the market as some kind of justification for your sentiment (read: your trading position).
if you look at the "market" back in oct/nov it was trading as high as 166p. so at that point was the market, with all its combined expertise and wisdom, in the know about the potential of what ava6000 could deliver? back in july 23 it was down at 88p. so was the market convinced at that point that ava6000 had no future? go back a bit further feb 23 and it was up at 180p. **** me, does the market know or does it not know, or, and this is more likely, do the swings just represent the oscillations of the trading fraternity until there is more concrete or definitive proof from the trials?
the current sp doesn't necessarily tell us anything about the science, perhaps all it does it reflect the fact that the placing was offered to a bunch of opportunist financiers who were let in at 50p, and the descent to 50p was just those anticipating a placing before any further significant news events. so long as there is sufficient time before the trial completes, the vacuum will be traded and we'll see peaks and troughs.
it is therefore you trying to suggest that the current share price should be taken as a bell weather of the success of the tech or the trial is where i take exception. if the participating funds were dumb and opportunistic, as has been discussed here today, then their opinion is irrelevant. if however they are knowledgeable and they still threw a few millions at avacta, then that would still be hugely significant. no institution with any significant reputation or integrity is going to pour millions down a hole, even if it were at 50p. if precision is gubbins, then it could still end up at 5p.
so, which is it wyndrum? a vote of confidence by investors in the know, or a bunch of clueless opportunists taking advantage of a 50p placing that should be ignored as far as the validity of ava6000 and precision is concerned?