Member Info for GoSushi

They might just be covering their IP bases without planning to develop yet.

Sucrase-isomaltase is an independent prognostic marker for colorectal carcinoma

Chemotherapy, which has limited efficacy and poor prognoses, is currently the primary option for treating colorectal cancer

I suspect they will be using targeted Paclitaxel for colon cancer.

Jive Turkey

what do you make of that then?

Have a Google of images using the terms tissue necrosis and doxorubicin and you will see just how damaging Doxorubicin can be to healthy tissue.

Oh yeah

Thanks

Energy Shares

I listened to that again a couple more times

I think she says AACR it just sounds like AACI

It’s a bit mumbled

Pretty sure she is just referring to the upcoming AACR

They will have all the 2 week trial data by then also.

Energy Shares

I wondered about that too

Thanks for the info Jive Turkey

Very informative

Touk

At which stage would you say is proof of platform?

End of 2 weekly study, part way through stage two?..another option?

Does that mean they will try for a broad range of high FAP comditions rather than just STS or is that a step too far?

What are the implications of this?

What does this actually mean?

My personal opinion is that they should be looking at high FAP expressing cancers and along with STS go for something like high FAP expressing pancreatic cancer which normally has had a very poor outcome.

The FDA has offered tissue-agnostic nods to other cancer drugs based on tumor response data. These prior approvals include Bayer’s Vitrakvi and Roche’s Rozlytrek, both for tumors with abnormal NTRK genes, and several PD-1 inhibitors for mismatch repair deficient or microsatellite instability-high cancers.

Last year, the FDA cleared Eli Lilly’s Retevmo for all cancers driven by alterations in the RET gene. It also approved Novartis’ Tafinlar and Mekinist combo for any solid tumors that have a BRAF V600E mutation.

In October, the FDA released a draft guidance on tumor-agnostic drug development. One requirement asks that drug developers show treatment effects that can be generalized across tumor types based on strong scientific rationale, including the biology of the drug’s target.

Keytruda can now also be used to treat adult and pediatric patients whose cancer has the biomarker MSI-H (microsatellite instability) or dMMR (mismatch repair).

For decades, cancer drugs have typically been approved and used to treat cancer based on the body location the cancer originates. The FDA’s approval of Keytruda based on genetics signifies a major paradigm shift in cancer treatmen

Found this on the internet

Larotrectinib is the first cancer drug to be FDA approved based on its effect on a specific mutation in a tumor.

The US Food and Drug Administration has approved the drug larotrectinib (Vitrakvi®; LOXO-101) for cancers caused by a genetic mutation called a TRK fusion. This groundbreaking targeted therapy is the first to be developed and approved based solely on its effect on a specific genetic change in a tumor, regardless of where in the body the tumor originated.

Thanks for the reply

Could AVA3996 then be broadly applied to all FAP rich cancers? Excluding blood cancers and others that it is not suitable for.

While FAP expression in normal tissues is usually low or undetectable, it is overexpressed in many cancers, including 90% of carcinomas. FAP is known to be overexpressed in breast, colorectal, pancreatic, lung, bladder, ovarian and other cancers.

So FDA has approved cancer treatments based on genetic features as opposed to tumour type

Such as Keytruda

So I wonder if FDA would approve AVA6000 in the same way

FAP alpha expressing tumours as opposed to tumour type

This would make sense as this is the key feature of how the mechanism works.

If this is the case then it would open up a massive market straight away.

What is does show thought is because there is really no other treatment for STS other than doxorubicin this probably helped in the treatment receiving fast track approval at the time.