Member Info for Okehurst1

Below is the main paragraph from the CEO of Omega on 30/11/20 re - Their Antigen Test

Suggest ‘ prototype ‘ is indicating the test is still early and possibly still in concept ? Interesting choice of words

Same with ‘ established ‘ , well chosen word again, Omega are ready for the TT once Mologic have frozen the design but had obviously not started 3 weeks ago.

From what we have learned - the hard way - there is no time limit on this, Omega will make a sample say 10,000 LFT ‘s once Mologic freeze the design ,part of which will then go to futility then onto Porton Down for clinical trials

Not sure if Omega are obliged to inform the market if the complete TT ?

Antigen testing

In June this year, the Company signed a material transfer agreement ("MTA") with Mologic providing access to raw materials and know-how to manufacture their lateral flow antigen test. This test determines the concentration of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) antigens in a saliva or swab extract sample to identify an individual with an infection. Mologic is currently evaluating a prototype in a number of healthcare settings and the results to date look promising. Omega has now established its technology transfer team and looks forward to working with Mologic to make a commercial success of this opportunity.

Looks like of you want to provide LFT tests to the U.K. you can buy the kit on Alibaba , wouldn’t be surprised if the Innova buffer is on there as well

These guys had their MHRA approval confirmed

https://kjmedical.m.en.alibaba.com/

Wonder who it is ?

This has just been added to the MHRA website.

Manufacturer: Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC)
Device/model name: COVID-19 Self-Test to detect infection in asymptomatic individuals

Issue date: 22/12/2020

Expiry date: 22/06/2021

MHRA reference number: DEU/012/2020/003

Speculating, one of the two may well be Mologic, a very good U.K. diagnostics business.

Not on the market, no interviews with the press promoting their test, just getting on with doing it.

It then goes back to how good are the Aptamers they are using in this use case ?

Interesting comment off Avacta’s latest partner, whilst not a complete like for like industry to diagnostics it does highlight another Pharma confirming the performance of the Affirmer over the Aptamer.

Relevant to Avacta as Mologic appear to be the only other competitor who may be able to produce a self administered at home antigen test.

Appreciate Avacta have still to produce a test to clear clinical trials but it’s an interesting technical ‘ face off ‘ between the two technologies, we can guess there is quite a lot of personal pride at stake from the scientists on both sides.

Steve Burton, President of Astrea Bioseparations commented:

"Affimer reagents are high-performance proteinaceous ligands that have been engineered for a wide range of applications as superior alternatives to antibody-based ligands. They can be used to selectively bind difficult targets, even where antibodies and aptamers have shown limitations.

Been a few questions on the BB regarding will the vaccine protect people from this new strain of Covid 19?’

Couple of quotes from the article below.

‘Whether a mutated virus will evade a vaccine depends on its structure. Often mutations in viruses cause such minute changes to the structure that vaccines developed against the original virus will still work. However, we have seen that this is not always the case – one particular SARS-CoV-2 variant from Danish mink, known as “Cluster 5”, has four different mutations in the spike protein. This is problematic for vaccine development because the spike protein is on the outer surface of the virus, so it tends to be the region against which antibodies are produced. This means spike protein modifications could potentially lead to a loss of immunity from COVID-19.’

‘ “We don’t know whether it’s possible for a mutated SARS-CoV-2 to evade current vaccine candidates at the moment.”

https://www.varsity.co.uk/science/20338

Can’t see how it can pick up asymptomatic day 2 to 8
with a 1.00E+ to 7.00E+ viral load range when it can only pick up viral load copies/ml from 50,000 to 200,000, it’s never going to happen.
This outfit will be no different to the students on Sky news yesterday, they are all just using the same buffer/reagent,
Avacta will be using very similar, it’s a commodity now

We have covered this subject but to recap
Avacta’s Elisa test is identifying at a just a few thousand copies /ml with 40pg/ml - although we don’t know the LFT range, it’s like searching for a needle in a haystack.

Avacta Affirmer vs Mologic Aptamer, looks like it’s these two in the final play off.

Last game next week, we will soon find out.

This has to be an indication of the volume of tests Avacta are expecting to procure and follows on from Alister’s predication of supplying 100M a month of tests.

We know Omega can provide 10M a month come April if they don’t supply Mologic - unconfirmed reports that Mologic have not passed the trial but that is hearsay.
If Mologic have failed then they will join the manufacturing process for Avacta
BBI of course as lead manufacturer
Abingdon ditto
Then overseas manufacturer’s to make up the balance.

Omega are an excellent established diagnostics engineer and I think MB is correct on this point that it won’t affect the company ,I do suggest the missed point is that this recruitment confirms the Avacta test must work.

Excellent research Lee.

Yeah that’s my thoughts RD, it’s all about the density.

Put aside the science, if this is how they cracked it then they have the whole market to themselves, I don’t know of any other man made molecule that is smaller and can be reversed engineered to ‘ collect ‘ not just ‘deliver ‘ - which is what this would be in this case

On a separate but connected point I don’t think Avacta would want or be able to sell its diagnostics division, the IP of the Affirmer is so interconnected, yes they will license but they couldn’t sell, as there is nothing to sell other than the Affirmer itself.

Suggest it’s the density in this case not the weight RD that’s the key.
This is why Alister quotes the pg/ml figure with some confidence, like he did with the Elisa test, 40pg/ml beats even PCR
In affect there are more Affirmers per pg/ml plus shall we say by default more ‘hooks’. So they can then capture more of the spike proteins as it’s like looking for a needle in a hay stack

This goes back to the big standard antigen reagent / buffers on the market, they are all pretty much the same, Avacta will be using a standard solution themselves and why no one else has produced a test that works to the level required.

I may be wrong on this thesis but to me it’s the only differential - if it works

Pl75, It certainly is interesting, it’s possibly the key measurement in determining the accuracy of a test - in this case definition of pg below.

Some medical tests report results in picograms per millilitre (pg/mL). A picogram is one-trillionth of a gram - which is so small -which has led me down this route.

This is why the Aptamer wont match the Affirmer in this case, structurally it’s too large in comparison, the Affirmer is smaller so the density of the Affirmers per pg/ml is of the highest order and there is no other man made molecule smaller in this case that can used.

I appreciate I may be wrong here but the signals are there , targeting both S&N proteins at the same time in this environment may have been the final piece of the solution?

For what’s it’s worth I think they have cracked it and we find out before Xmas.

In4pin
Good debate

Agree on the test brand names differential but the basic tech will be inside each Abbot antigen test
https://www.abbott.com/BinaxNOW-Test-NAVICA-App.html neither will suffice for the self administered home market .

Technically & commercially I think Abbott pushed a product out there so that they could take advantage to take a quick $buck in the USA but it’s not helped their reputation in this sector.

Note your point on the Avacta antigen LFT may not work.

We know they have managed to get the Elise test to 40pg/ml , I suspect in the lab they are between 40pg/ml to 60pg/ml for the LFT using a synthetic virus.The problem has been once in a live environment they have struggled to achieve the same.
However I suggest they may have overcome this issue and can cover the full range of 15ct to 28ct including
1.00+E to 7.00+E viral load.
It’s the concentrated mass of the Affirmers per m/l that is the differential alongside possibly targeting both the S & N protein’s, although I am not 100% on the latter point.

I may be wrong on the points above but I suggest we will find out next week, the pg/ml figure will be the key stat to watch for - I suspect Alister will disclose

Monk, agree , however we do know the Avacta Elisa test is identifying as low as 40pg/ml in live saliva as well.

We have to feel positive that this has been transferred to BAM’s - it would be amazing if they can also replicate in an LFT using live samples.

In4pin

Whilst wary of lancet reports as a stand-alone assessment this one is interesting and was published a 9 days after the report posted earlier today

It’s not complimentary of the Abbot test

It quotes.

‘For example, organisations relying on BinaxNOW miss three times as many infections as they have been led to believe’

Full report

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32635-0/fulltext

In the case of the Abbott test ‘it’s stuck in the weeds’, it won’t come anywhere near Avacta’s BAM’s test - if Avacta’s claims of 50pg/ml are correct - and it won’t be suitable for home use as everyone would need a piece of kit and It couldn’t trust it in a care home environment- if the peer review above is correct

It basically useless for identifying infectious people - with a high level of confidence/ accuracy

In4pin

This is the problem with Abbot , they can’t get the range on the Ct, 15 to 28 , this is why it’s not been rolled out globally

The same problem applies to Avacta, now if they can get down to 50pg/ml as they can do in the Elisa test and cover the Ct range above they should pick up from 1.00 to 7.00 virus range, which looks like day 2 of being infected to day 8 - then it drops off the charts .

This week / next week I guess we will find out

Tom, handy research

Just on the lancet study, it’s handy to see where the writers get funding

‘Dr. Wensing reports grants from ViiV Healthcare, Gilead, grants from Janssen, Gilead, Merck, grants from Janssen, Gilead, Merck, ViiV Healthcare, grants from ARK diagnostics’

Vivi for example is funded by Pfizer, GSK to name just 2 of the big Pharma who control this one.

Biodot needs a piece of kit so won’t be suitable for home use, it does appear there is no one out there who has managed to solve the self administered home use market.

Let’s hope Avacta can do it

Not sure what value you can place on Avacta today?

90M LFT tests a month for U.K. Government for at least 18 months and if as per unit price indicated by Alister thats £20B gross
Add any global licensing deals for LFT
BAM’s Bruker , should run for a number years
Ava 6000
LG ,Plus any other Cancer treatment Licensing deals.
Then the IP value of the Affirmer platform

It’s perverse when you look at the current market cap but the next announcement could see Avacta become an asset that has no realistic bid price that would satisfy the Avacta board and their major shareholders - this assumes positive news on the above of course.

Astra Zeneca missed the boat when the share price was 10p

Excellent post Monk

Would you agree that Affirmer’s can be manufactured to be in more abundance per pg/ml in the buffer/ reagent than Aptamers? Plus more stable ?

Feel these two points are key

What’s your opinion?

Thanks for sharing NR11

Arnold, best post of the week