The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Once SNG001 begins to obtain approvals around the world, 100,000 courses per month presumably will be nothing like enough to meet demand. Does anyone have any idea how quickly and to what sort of level production could be ramped up - either by SNG alone or with the help of a partner - even if it is only for a limited period until vaccines take effect.
The difference between the two results for the AZN vaccine (62% effective for the 8895 people on 2 doses and 90% effective for the 2741 on 1.5 doses) is puzzling, to say the least. Apart from the dose, one other difference between the two was that the 2741 arm contained no one over 55 years old.
If we make the enormous assumption that this age difference was the only factor leading to the different result for the two arms, we can infer the vaccine's efficiency for over 55 year olds. (Making the assumption that the arms were otherwise the same and that the different dose had no effect is, I would be the first to agree, wholly unscientific, but what else have we got? Perhaps all this does is illustrate why results delivered by headline are dangerous.)
The arithmetical implication is that if 31% of the 8895 arm were over 55, the vaccine is 0% effective for over 55 year olds. If 40% over 55, then 20% effective, and if 50%, then 34% effective. Speaking as a 68 year old, this worries me somewhat. I do wonder whether his vaccine will turn out to be one that protects those that already have healthy immune systems and does little for those that don't.
I would love this vaccine to be effective, but I think I'm going to need convincing.
I believe it is placebo-controlled. This is what the recent placing document says, "Synairgen’s clinical trial in COVID-19 patients, SG016, is a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The two- part 221 patient trial comprises 101 patients initiated in the hospital setting (top-line results announced 20 July 2020, details of which are below), and a further 120 patients in the home setting (currently ongoing)."
It does raise a serious question. I can see that, within a household with two Covid patients and where one is recovering and the other not, there might be a strong temptation to swap treatments. As you point out, this would seriously compromise the trial. I wonder what Synairgen's answer to this is. One possibility is that everyone in the same household receives the same treatment, i.e. all dosed or all placebo. (It would still be blind because no one would know which of those two everyone received.)
Meanwhile, CW25, all the best to your parents.
PMJH - I know this is a bit ancient, but I think this would be helpful background on Reddit for new shareholders
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqDd7ixh184
For what it's worth, here is my shot at an angry e-mail for people to use as they see fit.
Why does the media not discuss treatments for Covid19? With the exception of the US drug Remdesivir, which is largely useless and was, it seems, pushed through the system by Trump, you appear to be only interested in the progress of vaccines, but we know they may not do the job – certainly not on their own.
Synairgen's SNG001, a therapy that could be rolled out now, is a nebuliser containing a natural substance, interferon beta 1a, that is simply inhaled directly into the lungs. It had spectacular results in its phase 2 trial, where it stopped Covid-19 in its tracks for 79% of those hospitalised patients who were given it, and from that and other trials, we know also that it is safe.
Synairgen, a British company based in Southampton, will be heralded across the world once SNG001 is recognised for what it can do. We’re heading fast into a desperate situation, and the government needs to stop footling about.
I think anyone anxious about the impact that vaccine developments might have on the share price should bear in mind that the market cap of Synairgen will be roughly £350 million once all the new shares are listed. That is very modest for a company in possession of a drug with the prospects and potential of SNG001.
Manifesto, many thanks, but I'm afraid that wasn't quite my point. I'm not talking about the benefits of SNG001 being compromised (far from it). The point I was trying to make was that those unlucky enough to be on placebo in P3 are probably going to do a bit better than they did when P2 was run.
I'm as confident as anyone else about the outcome here, but someone earlier raised the question of whether the P3 results would be quite as spectacular as the P2 results, because the use of other treatments, such as blood thinners and dexamethasone, has become widespread. Would anyone be able to hard a guess at how much impact this might have on the results? At some point, it might be sensible to feed this factor into the market so that market expectations aren't too high.
When you say "they" I presume you mean the FDA
Matml - many thanks. I'm interested in the difference between your "few hundred thousand doses a month" from July and the 100,000 per month quoted recently. Are we possibly confusing ourselves because some people are talking about treatments (i.e. the full 14 day dose) and others are counting the single day doses? Assuming that is not the case, and everyone is talking about 14 day treatments, there is still a lot of difference, when it comes to potential sales, between "one" and "a few".
If SNG001 were to be given some sort of approval tomorrow, do we have any idea of how many treatments (of 14 doses) Synairgen could deliver? I know they have said that they are producing 100,000 treatments per month, but what is the current stockpile, if anything?
I suppose what I'm saying is that the frustration we are all experiencing at the slow recognition and approval of a drug that could knock this pandemic on the head at a stroke (please wake up, Mr Han****) may not be that critical until production really gets going. I know there has been and perhaps remains a chicken and egg element to this, but I suppose we have to be realistic about recognising the reality of the situation.
Going back to the WHO Solidarity trial, I fully understand that they used IV interferon beta 1a, whereas SNG001 is delivered via nebuliser, but would someone like to have a go at explaining why that makes such a difference. I can see that the delivery of IV interferon to the sites reached by nebulised interferon is comparatively indirect, but presumably it eventually gets there - or maybe not?
Decided by whom, and if so, why isn't it used?
It is a wrong, but I think widespread, perception that SNG001 is unproven, being backed by a phase 2 trial that was too small to be significant. We on this board know better than that, but it might help if the drug had a brand name. SNG001 does sound experimental, so suggestions please for a name. How about Nebinterbia - nebulised interferon beta 1a? It's only a suggestion - I'm sure others can do better.
sorry - reviewed
WedMe, do you have a link to the peer-revised study you mentioned right at the start of your first page? Great work, by the way - many thanks.
Should we all send a copy of this to Patrick Vallance? After all, he clearly has authority, being the idiot responsible for replacing SNG001 with a useless antibiotic on the Recovery trial. Does anyone have his contact details?
(Already posted on old thread - sorry about that)
Should we all send a copy of this to Patrick Vallance? After all, he clearly has authority, being the idiot responsible for replacing SNG001 with a useless antibiotic on the Recovery trial. Does anyone have his contact details?
If Southampton Hospital has access to SNG001 and is allowed to use it, I don't see why that cannot apply to all other hospitals in the UK. What would happen if the head of the Covid team in a hospital wrote to Synairgen or now Clinigen and asked for a supply?
How do hospitals get told that there is an MAP available to them?