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.
I disagree, it wasn't a pointless video at all. I personally learnt a lot more if the detail about their different ventures.
You have to take the rough with the smooth with a PH type interviewer. Yes he interrupted too much, but that style also has allowed AS to give a different angle and much more detail to different parts of the business. Scripted questions gives stilted scripted answers. This was not that.
PH had some fishing questions (particularly around timing of lft validation etc) but he wasn't quite patient enough to see if he caught anything. Doubt he would have anyway. AS answers to timing of lft imo were stock answers, reiterating previous RNS and comments. I don't think they gave new insight into timings. Better to assume results could come any day between now and 4 weeks.
Good find. The acceptable sensitivity of 70% appears low on the face of it, although desirable is 97%. We know optimers/affimers have high specificity. It leaves a lot of room to allow a breath test to pass.
That is interesting. I thought they said they were NP tests before. Now it is NP/AN. Surescreen are also part of the rapid antigen test consortium so seems inevitable that they would also pivot to AN if at all possible.
It is also interesting that the govt have played their cards with Surescreen. Their total contract over 2 years with extensions etc is £500m. Assuming £5 a test, that's 50m tests a year, or 1m a week. There is a significant shortfall to get to 2m a day as per PA consulting plan.
It's also interesting that they've not pushed Surescreen further, say with ODX capacity. On the face of it their sens/spec is as high as it could be and they can be AN. Maybe the rest of the capacity has been pre-allocated, pending validation. Or the AffiDx test has some other feature to warrant waiting for results. Tech transfer probably started with Avacta/ODX in Jan.
Muck. I wrote the below on the 16th Feb:
"Also, the curious mention of Avct not selling in the USA yet... In the RNS today. Abdx are setting up in the USA. Could they be gearing up to manufacture and sell to the US market?"
Hopefully this is what is happening as would potentially be a quicker route to sale (and would help avct ;-) ).
Boris mentioned in his interview today that they had 50 millions lft's. It wasn't completely clear if this was their total stockpile, but if so, that will be burned through very quickly. There will be no chance that there will be a shortage as that would be terrible PR, just when the govt Covid-related PR is at a high. Lets hope the switch to British made ones is seamless. If they are not buying any more Innova, the switch will have to be this month.
Mowzer I think each 10m a month gets you £2 a share if you are looking on a 2 year horizon (AS said 2-5 years).
I'm hoping many outline deals are already in place, subject to validation results. Wouldn't like to put a figure on number we could produce, but safe to say I'm hoping for multiples of 10m a month.
I also think we could will see an iterative increase in share price over months. If we get clinical validation results in line with earlier results, I think we will see initial rises but not the huge gains initially. Then more and more manufacturers could be added. Then Europe deals, then licensing/USA etc. Think I heard we did cancer as well ;-). I'd sell now, or hold long term. Obviously I'm still here so going for the latter.
I think we'll get significantly more than £1 a test. We own the tech, we own the test. We've taken all the risks. A manufacturer like ODX for example loans in government bought equipment and just makes whatever test has made it through validation, amongst many that have failed. I would expect £2-3 a test min from govt and more when selling privately.
10m imo is our nailed on initial capacity. If the govt are on board, I think it will be far higher.
One final question if I may.
Innova (and others) are nasopharyngeal swabs, although in the NHS they have, off license, recommended doing anterior nasal swabs. Is the reason for np solely to increase quantity of antigen or is it because the sample is better (less variable matter and viscosity). AS comments that spike was more robust implied in the real world they would be easier to work with. I wonder if this might be what he meant?
What it does show, with the benefit of hindsight, is that we have improved our lod 6x from Nov RNS. I think this is pretty impressive (in the Nov RNS they were confident that lod was in the range needed). This to me explains the delays. They have not been twiddling their thumbs. I think this shows development of a high performing lft is not easy. It also shows that there could well be merit in the hybrid Mologic/Avacta N/S test in the future. Looking forward to bigger clinical data.
Thanks. Although avacta gave the common measure of pfu, they are still not comparing complete like with like and down at those levels, even a small difference can be wrong by an order of magnitude. That is why, although slightly disappointed with the analytical Lod, it is mostly superceded by the clinical results. By their Lod, they shouldn't be detecting a CT value positive of 25-26 so there must be something lost in translation.
Agree monks, as yet nothing to prove it is the best, but am hopeful of excellent translation into clinical results (as already seen).
Theres a bit more meat on the bones in both the video today and the business update. AS said they believe targeting the spike protein is better because it is on the outside of the virus and is more stable, robust and soluble. Do you think these things compensate for the reduced numbers of spike compared to n proteins? Their analytical sensitivity compared to n protein tests isn't stunning. But I'm wondering whether you put all the info together, it means that Avacta's test will translate really well into clinical testing and particularly field trials (which is where Innova fell down)?
Avacta certainly made a point about saying that any test needs to be able to translate their LOD to clinical samples and clinical testing. Would be grateful for your views.
Yes it does look that way Alchemyst. If I were to guess, the Govt have been in direct communication with Avacta, Mologic and Surescreen continuously over the last few months. The govt have probably told them they will get a big order if the following can be met:
Pass Porton Down assessment
CE mark
Charge £5-6 per test
Anterior nasal ideally
Begin selling by April 2021
The Mologic CE marking speeds up the processes, but also decreases risk, as if Avacta accreditation is delayed further (it's already been delayed at least once) they would look pretty silly.
Thanks ben.
There are a lot of smoke and mirrors, that's for sure. Why did Mologic get initial data and CE mark last year and are still being evaluated by ?Porton Down? Why are they not selling their test already? The ODX board are also getting very frustrated by the delays in tech transfer of the mologic lft. We formally started working with Mologic recently, but it had been going on for many months before. Of note we have improved the sensitivity of the AffDx test considerably in that time. Mologic must have been helping with this. I also can't really understand why, other than the UK diagnostics industry really are being collaborative and see the bigger picture of supporting each other will result in those companies all thriving. Mologic and Avacta will work together on a whole programme of other projects after this and maybe even the hybrid lft. As mentioned before, it is not a zero sum game.
@benbenbenben do you know whether the field trials on the Mologic lft are being conducted by Porton Down or Mologic themselves?
Presumably it is not an either or decision for the government. If one or both tests meet the required standards, they will approve and buy one or both tests.
Infinis, it's a moot point anyway because subsequent testing with clinical samples showed excellent results. Even the HuffPost, DHSC and Avacta all agree on this point!
Nearly done, yes. Odds on that we have a trading update in the next 3 days, which will include definitive data (as per RNS). Out of coincidence, the HuffPost predicted we would have our final assessment, done by Porton Down, published this week.