Member Info for Mars1

Soup agreed warrant allocation timing odd. It is unusual for NEDS to benefit in such a way as they do not fulfill an executive position which is why I think they have been doing more than usual especially as they have all been awarded the same allocation as the chair who has taken on the executive role. It suggests the other 2 NEDS are actively involved. It also suggests the issue had to be done quickly ie before a result otherwise the benefit is lost.

I believe the bod can appoint auditors in the first instance as it is a requirement for a listed company to have auditors, it would then be ratified by shareholders vote at the AGM.

March date is interesting for 004 reveal, as it also means the market competition of the originator will be aware of an available IP in that space. My view is you don’t need a BDD to approach a known party, it would be disappointing if the bod had not followed up the plan shown on the website. So do heads of agreement need to be wrapped up by reveal date?

Yes it would be good to know, I can only think of one reason why significant progress could not be notified and that is when it is outside of the total control of the bod ie where a third party is involved

On reflection I think they can only resign and can only do so when there is a replacement ie it is the only option under co law as a listed company must always have an auditor. It is deemed good practice to change auditors every 3 years the large firms avoid resigning by changing the partner in charge

They prefer to resign than be sacked. Co has changed all their advisers so why not auditors. Fees do not tend to fall value is usually found with change. Plenty of liquidity and low cost model so?

FFS AR did say they continue to make significant progress for both 004 and 002 on 8/2. The only action in November for 004 was to contact the originator. It is wait and see. AR did say last year we will know when it is delivered and they would not speculate over delivery

$6.22nd by 2030;
Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Market Insights 2030:

The global idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis market size was valued at $3,126.08 million in 2020, and is projected to reach $6,169.37 million by 2030, registering a CAGR of 7.0% from 2021 to 2030

Global Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) Market Report 2021: Market was Valued at $3271.3 Million in 2020 - Forecast to 2026
January 20, 2022 04:43 ET
| Source: Research and Markets

Dublin, Jan. 20, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The "Global Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) Market - Analysis By Drug Type, End User, By Region, By Country (2021 Edition): Market Insights, Pipeline and Forecast with Impact of COVID-19 (2021-2026)" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

Global Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Market is projected to display robust growth valued at USD 3271.3 Million in the year 2020 with North America leading the regional market share.

The primary driver of growth in the IPF market in recent years has been an increased use of the high-priced Pirfenidone (Esbriet) and Nintedanib (Ofev) brands in favour of off-label pharmacological therapies and non-pharmacological treatments. Prior to the approval of these drugs, cheap corticosteroids and immunosuppressant's were used to treat IPF despite negative recommendations in evidence-based guidelines for general treatment.

The major factors that drive the growth of the global idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis market include rise in prevalence of fibrotic disease and increase in geriatric population. In addition, surge in demand for cost-effective drugs and introduction of advanced treatment options propel the market growth.

Furthermore, changing lifestyle patterns and increasing consumption of nicotine products is providing a thrust to the market growth. Moreover, smoking tobacco and cigarettes is considered the most common causes for the development of IPF. In line with this, increasing health consciousness among the masses regarding the effective management strategies of IPF is also favoring the growth of the market.

Additionally, the advent of novel medicines and advancements in the IPF diagnostic and treatment methods, are acting as other growth-inducing factors. This, along with extensive research and development (R&D) activities and improvements in the healthcare infrastructure, represents some of the other factors anticipated to drive the market.

Moreover, to pharmacological treatments, various non-pharmacological treatments are also used for IPF patients. The most used non-pharmacological treatments are lung transplantations, mechanical ventilation, oxygen therapy, and pulmonary rehabilitation. In general, the treatment approach in IPF is largely dependent on a patient's symptoms, the stage of the disease, and a patient's overall health.

The companies analysed in the report include AbbVie Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffman-La Roche, Ltd., Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck KGaA, Gilead Sciences, Liminal Biosciences, Cipla, Galapagos NV, FibroGen, Medicinova Inc.

Key Topics Covered:

1. Report Scope and Methodology
1.1 Scope of the Report
1.2 Research Methodology
1.3 Executive Summary

2. Strategic Recommendations

3. Idiopathic Pu

we continue to make significant progress and I look forward to making further announcements in due course."

It is start of a new year, budgets/projects to be met for CPI so funding will be required, this will be rated as a mature project so will be liquidated when funds required irrespective of what is in progress

Jiving if news comes that holding will turnover in a day, CPI May invest to support firms they do not appear to have a very supporting exit strategy

If ARs comment at the end of the Oxilio RNS is anything to go by he has significant news but is not yet able to release it, so cannot be product inherent update cause that could be updated without Any need for delay. I was wondering whether the warrant allocation was due to the NEDS taking a more active role due to circumstances beyond their control ie no business dev person in place, one may not be needed now. Announcement delay can only be due to third party impact, the 004 route after patent application is clearly laid out. If the wording is accurate in the RNS looks as though 002 is caught up in the process.

Comparatively narrow spread atm. Do MMS want shares

AR did say significant progress in the RNS and further announcements to follow.

There has been no RNS regarding a deal for CINV

The ave p/e is 25, that values NXp1 at £50m

Personal view, the regs I am quoting are the transition regulations for the period the U.K. is leaving the EC. They are the regs the U.K. Gov have agreed, it would have been that way to permit EU authorised marks to transition to the U.K. regs. So they have permitted EU marks to continue until 30/6/23.

Apple see below
CE marking
We will continue to accept CE marked devices on the Great Britain market until 30 June 2023. This applies to devices that have been CE marked under and fully conform with the following applicable EU legislation:

Directive 90/385/EEC on active implantable medical devices (EU AIMDD) (for devices that have been CE marked prior to 26 May 2021)
Directive 93/42/EEC on medical devices (EU MDD) (for devices that have been CE marked prior to 26 May 2021)
Directive 98/79/EC on in vitro diagnostic medical devices (EU IVDD) (for devices that have been CE marked prior to 26 May 2022)
Regulation 2017/745 on medical devices (EU MDR)
Regulation 2017/746 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices (EU IVDR)
From 1 July 2023, devices that are placed on the Great Britain market will need to conform with UKCA marking requirements.

Apple but was that U.K. approval I think so, it was not EU approval. The EU agreement says tests can be sold in GB cannot see how subsequent legislation can affect an EU agreement