Member Info for Merchantbanker

Maylands - No not on twitter

How accurate are the tests:

"Out of 11 different tests studied, the best could correctly identify individuals with coronavirus antibodies over 80% of the time, while also correctly ruling out those who don’t in more than 98% of tested individuals"

11 tests, and the best one was over 80% confidence - claimed at 84% on the link in previous post. The best one at 84......

Shows how significant the UK RTC achievement is.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/medicine/research-and-impact/groups/react-study/faqs/

Bottom of this article.... the best test available at the time was used, and they are clearly not committed to the same test.

"The study will be repeated in autumn, testing 200,000 people, and research on the accuracy of different LFTs is ongoing to ensure that the best available test is used in the REACT programme as it continues"

Pretty clear the UK RTC is now the best and timing appears too good to ignore.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/201893/largest-study-home-coronavirus-antibody-testing/

https://www.imperial.nhs.uk/about-us/news/largest-home-antibody-testing-publishes-results

Fortress own twitter feed reads "had been involved" and confess sensitivity is only 84%. We know there is a better test and we know it's now going into production and therefore supply agreement is imminent to help supply these tests for 14th September distribution..

https://twitter.com/fortressdiag/status/1293924556755947522

Mologic specialise in research, design, development, pilot and validation batches and small to medium size production. They don't have the capacity to supply tests in high demand. The Mologic test will be Omega's test when it is ready to be handed over. Positive endorsement of the Mologic test is great for ODX. A successful Heathrow trial feeding the government test assessment decisions is fantastic news. It is a live trial in a real life scenario and of far greater worth than any clinical trial.

Here's the relevant Mologic news. Obviously our test use the same technology, so it's injdirectly a positive validation, but not directly IMO.

https://mologic.co.uk/mologic-ce-marks-professional-use-rapid-diagnostic-test-for-covid-19-and-begins-manufacture/

Ethio - My view on it is that the test that has WHO approval is the rapid professional use test that we are not involved in and the one Mologic will be making themselves in their newly set up company to provide access to low income countries for £1.

WHO approval is really only important if trying to sell to UN organisations as part of aid programmes or smaller countries that wont have their own validation procedures, like the CD4 tests we just got WHO approval for. Seeing as we are planning on selling to larger governments, private labs and other I'm not sure we will be looking for WHO approval, rather local approvals like obtained in UK/India/Senegal.

UK RTC Tech transfer complete and Validation batches - Due
Commencement of commercial manufacturing up to 100k units - Due
UK RTC supply contract - Due
MHRA self test approval - Due
Elisa Antibody sales update - Due
Elisa Antibody further approvals update - Due
Elisa finger prick device update - Due
Antigen Elisa test development update - Due
Mologic Antibody lateral flow test CE mark - Due
Food Self Test Approval - Due
Update on CD4 orders - Due

2 Options. Sulk that we haven't heard anything yet, sell and miss out.... or hold/buy more.

Thanks CautiousOptimist. A good read. Will be fantastic for all concerned if further clinical trials come to the same conclusion. Fingers crossed as that will be huge in the fight against Covid.

PL75 - I wasn't giving opinion on whether it still has merits or not, just commenting on the biological science that may explain the use of those specific words. But published sensitivity of the test should be on a random sample of proven positives and negatives and compared to the gold standard, which currently is PCR.

Regarding the comment about "the most infectious people", and this applies to any Saliva based test, is that it is still unknown how accurate saliva testing will be compared to a swab. A swab picks up surface pathogens, whereas saliva may contain a lower concentration of pathogens or no detectable virus. Being that the virus transmits from person to person largely from saliva whether directly or from hands, the most infectious people are those with viral pathogens in their saliva. So my take on this is if the virus is in the Saliva, they believe they will pick it up, but you could have somebody that is carrying the virus that has no detectable pathogens in their saliva. Somebody who has no or low concentration of viral pathogens in their saliva can be considered less infectious. This is where the clinical validation against PCR tests will be crucial to understand the true sensitivity. A PCR test amplifies the sample so where pathogen concentration is low this amplification process enables accurate analysis.

Abingdon have been advertising their services for lateral flow manufacturing for some time now. Just like we have with Mologic they will want some product diversification as it’s sensible business strategy. Looks like Abingdon are no more a manufacturing partner and won’t brand and sell the test as their own like we will with Mologic tests.

Congratulations on securing the services of a fantastic partner. Abingdon are an excellent company.

That is coming from a guy that has a material position in the stock that isn't an answer, he's hardly going to say anything else. Highlighting potential i can accept that could have an impact, but not 1000%.

PL75 - thanks for a rare constructive offering. My question though is why on 3rd April before the Covid test was announced, with 207m, shares in issue at 19p was the business valued at £40m? I have seen one RNS on the core business since.
Yes i accept the cashing up of £48m adds value because the funds can unlock further value, but I can't accept that on 3 April the valuation was 10 times less than what it is currently worth without covid?

OK well done then Condor are evaluating the test which is the holy grail of any test. It's perfect and you will sell 100 bn tests a week at £30 each. You will probably get Margot Robbie to extract the saliva from gentleman's mouths with her tongue, bradley cooper for the ladies, which will then take sales into the trillions. Probably will have eradicated cancer by the end of the week too. Perhaps Alistair Smith will get a statue outside every NHS hospital.

JDT - Sorry but the comments going around about Avacta or so far over hyped. I agree there is so much room in the market, but i think people are 5 steps ahead of where the test actually is with AVCT. It needs to be reigned in about as it may well fail. They day they come out and say it passes the validation and is full steam ahead i agree its onto a winner, but i feel the chance of success does not meet the valuation. That is my opinion and if you don't agree i respect that but i am entitled to my opinion.
Yes i accept they raised at 125, but that was based on a spike driven purely by COVID hope. The business has not really progressed since. This value of the core business wasn't there before COVID, so why does covid revalue the core business? The covid test hasn't proved the Affimer platform yet. When it does get there i agree with you. But quite simply, they have not achieved anything yet. There is no proof of success in diagnostics or therapeutics yet. That is my concern. Not that they wont get there, as they may well, but chance of success and valuation are way overweight IMHO.
Affirmer - yeah they did well to raise at that value, and have been working hard to justify it since.
DOH - No i was hoping for some sensible discussion.

Mikey-P - I'll tell you what it's all about. I made a couple of points and asked a few questions on Avacta that nobody has a reasonable answer for which are all fair and for open debate. Instead of having a discussion they are trying to downplay ODX. Pathetic really. I didn't bring ODX up over there they did.
I hope they do work out as the downside if it doesn't will hurt. If Avacta was valued at 50m which i think is fair for the risk i would not have a problem with it. Maybe the upside is potentially higher than here but at current valuations and current chances of success the difference is crazy. I haven't even said that on the board i just challenged their idea of the significance of the CONDOR validation.

Of course it does! The trial results are in the hand of the DHSC. That is where the findings of Condor will go for final decision.

Tricky the point i am trying to make is there are maybe a few possible saliva tests. They are so convinced that every time one is mentioned it is theirs and they are going for global domination. I cant see evidence that their test is even finished let alone of sufficient quality. We can say the same for our antigen test, but at least we have 4 other test that are already there or on the brink, and we dont have a £400m mcap gambling on one tests success. I hope it does come off but i want to know why at £400m it is good risk reward and nobody can tell me.

Rahrah - you make excellent points. Mologic do not need to screen and shout about every single step they take. They are not looking to impress anyone, just solve a global pandemic.

Mr Spacetomato - we don't claim to know the performance of the Antigen test yet. But guess what we have other tests already going to market. And guess what we are working with as partner and ODX who have proven track records of success. And we are not valued at £400m with everything riding on one tests selling many more than the current agreements would enable it to make.