We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
This is a bit of a pointless discussion…it’s folk just trying to be negative…
Sure, first user advantage has some benefits, but new entrants come along with products that are cheaper, easier to use, more accessible etc… etc… whatever the market…
The list isn’t really relevant now though…market is wildly different to two years ago, less money kicking around, lot more reverted to cash etc…
Abdx floated similar time at 110p, fell to 3.75p
Trellus was 70p ipo same time, now trading around 6p…
Compared to most recent placings, Ciz raise at 5-10% below current SP was a strong endorsement imho…
On a collective £120k salary…yep some lifestyle company…
I’ve got a plasterer in today…he makes £50k a year…think the guys at Cizzle are in this for the greater good and future financial upside from success, rather than it being a lifestyle business…
It was on the cards…funded through FY24 doesn’t mean they could leave it till then…the fact it’s done and dusted rather than open placing removes the protracted drama around the raise.
If Conduit had got away in Q1 they may have avoided a raise, but given the delays there, felt inevitable.
Expecting an update in the next few days now this is out of the way to create some positive momentum.
The company didn’t pump it up, they’ve played it with a straight bat, getting on with the job in hand - news will be announced when it can - AS certainly wasn’t ramping things up on Stockbox / Sunday roast calls etc…
Any pumping was just coming from the twitterati…no different to other shares each week.
Not phased at all by current SP personally, if it falls further I’d expect it to be aggressively bought into…
I’m not seeing bad luck if you have a slightly longer timeframe…the science is strong as are the personnel, short term volatility typical of small caps…chunky sells / change of hands will have that effect.
If the exec are willing to stick to a collective £120k remuneration package and take options instead, they know they’re heading in the right direction…
Hi LB,
I thought for Nasdaq listings the key criteria was oddly the SP rather than MC, so a consolidation of shares would get them to the threshold ?? - was a similar discussion on Accustem (Tiziana spin out which will have an MC of $11mn if successful book build)
Price is due to be c.£8 from memory so competitive.
Also being sold through Lloyds pharmacies plus Amazon, not sure on others yet…
Will women trust it? Isn’t that the point of testing and approval processes? - pretty sure it will become the norm…
Https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/conduit-pharmaceuticals-to-become-a-publicly-traded-company-via-merger-with-murphy
I thought it was due to ipo at around $700mn (bit out of date so may not be wholly accurate now)
I’d be surprised if it was ML given the consistent and prolonged way he built up his stake (and if looking at short term only he’s had plenty of time to sell down at higher values).
My assumption was that it was short to mid term investors who think they’ll get a better return on other popular shares e.g. Prem, which has fallen off from highs…imho…
Yep, agree, so for Ciz:
Amino acid fragments from Stage 1 lung cancer being absorbed by fibrinogen enables LDT to pick up early detection of stage 1 LC - hopefully to a very high level - sensitivity/specificity/PPV data may come with assay optimisation RNS.
Diagnosis initially at hospital but hopefully through LFT eventually local clinician level, at which point patient goes into broader confirmation diagnosis and treatment (which will be cheaper and more successful given early capture).
LungLife
Individual presents symptoms, goes through usual pathway (x-ray, MRI scan…).
Blood draw and testing would present most appropriate treatment pathway (assume over time that is enhanced as you can draw down on far more data with relevant blood markers to see what is most successful based on the data captured).
Should be compatible rather than competition imv.
I thought LLAIs test wasn’t anything to do with diagnosis - my understanding is that it is used off the back of a CT scan as a tool to help determine the most appropriate treatment pathway, and will use AI learning to help improve its effectiveness in doing so as a result of the blood profiles it builds up in its database, rather than actual testing for stage 1 lung cancer…
Correct me if you think I’m misinterpreting something…
Hi Jimzi,
I don’t think Imutex has been side lined just written down for accounting purposes…
For me, this morning’s announcement was clearing the decks for the sale of Hvivo, I’d expect Imutex to sit in the holding company / other vehicle while it progresses - granted its slow (very), but it’s only end of Sept since they did the in vitro study so still being invested in, and in my view a valuable asset. From memory, Hvivo paid £14mn for their stake on 2016, did a challenge study gratis, and then the 2018 ph2b…
For info, feedback from IR on the in vitro study a couple of months back…(the 2018 ph2b only targeted two strains, the in vitro was five).
The in vitro study was significant because it investigated the activity of FLU-v against five different influenza strains, which is pertinent to its intended use as a broad-spectrum influenza vaccine. The Phase 2b study and human challenge study showed that FLU-v was safe, able to elicit an immune response and reduce mild to moderate influenza symptoms, but the candidate still requires examination against a wider set of influenza strains – this in vitro study was a precursor to studying FLU-v’s broad spectrum capabilities in a wider in vivo study.
Thanks for your reply Neil,
Have read all your previous posts previously (more than once :-) )which proved v useful!
The piece I’m trying to join the dots on is the last pathfinder results, I can track down summary findings but not the full research paper.
From DCs 2016 paper (published 2017 from memory) Cizzle have got 95% accuracy and c.74% specificity for stage 1, and as they work through final optimisation that will hopefully increase.
Grails paper in Annals of Oncology from 2021 shows 16.8% sensitivity stage 1, and high specificity, but specificity not broken down by stage.
Their interim pathfinder study for MCED-E test was 43% ppv (previous 38% for MCED), but this was PPV rather than sensitivity, so can’t reconcile with CIZ sensitivity and more critically, Grails ppv figure is blended for cancer stages so success heavily skewed towards Stage 3 and 4.
I can’t though find the full paper for the final Grail pathfinder study, just summary info… not sure if you can point me in the right direction? (increasingly heavily invested here so try to understand as much as possible about the wider landscape :-) )
Thanks
Morning,
Just a couple of things to post…
1) Illumina ownership of Gilead
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/us-ftc-orders-illumina-divest-cancer-detection-test-maker-grail-2023-04-03/
2) On the Galleria test - when I look at the paper in Annals of Oncology it states just 16% sensitivity of detection at Stage 1 for the Galleria test, whereas I thought it had been mentioned as in the 30-40% range. Any thoughts? Cheers
https://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923-7534(21)02046-9/fulltext