Member Info for RorkesDrift

I'm confused - and suspect....

So there was no P1 data before the P1 trial started. The trial is one patient in.

It sounds likeba snake swallowing its tail

Oh hang on...

AVA6000 P1 Clinical Trial Data is known to those making the decision to expand the clinical trial. If data were not known they would not be able to progress the trial and increase participants for safety concerns

Not trying to catch you out but what do you mean by "expand" the trial. The original protocol was being followed at last update - have you heard something different?

Sisu - Data is already known as to the safety/eficacy of AVA6000 within man

Can you post a link?

Thanks - so it sounds like the guy thinks of the analysis in discrete products. One failed - the rest continue to move forward.

Talks efficacy read out on one product before switching to safety on another. Great clarification - suspect he is trying but clear as mud.

Historic data is Synairgen will pass safety - key is does it work in this patient population. He said nothing about that.

Price will only move one way or through other on changes in that status.

Bump

https://twitter.com/AIMdective/status/1446136394594729987?t=46tUbcijBoMEj1PohC7Y1w&s=19

The question is what does he say didn't meet primary efficacy. Sounds like Orafil?

Next question is was this being trialled at same time as Synairgen?

If so was patient recruitment stopped at sane time I.e is active 2 a discrete study or a rolling study where products can be added or removed and compared to a common control

Hevdescrive two new MAB - the use of new implies they were added after the "orafil"

Bump

To be honest the efficacy and safety data reports tend to produced in tandem.

To me it sounds has if the data is in, has been cleaned and verified and the statistics performed. The comparative incidence of low rate AEs will probably not hit statistical significance so requires expertise and maybe subset verification - see breathless patients last time.

The groups may not be balanced first confounding factors and thus they will want to ensure this is accounted for and built into the next phase.

News is probably positive ( we are still in) but I'm not doing cart wheels yet. Suspect result may not be as clear cut but that would be par for the course. Hopefully will be good enough for EUA.

Core competency would be "Regulatory Management". Very very specific to pharma and medical devices. Not sure if selling £4 dresses qualifies.

What might qualify is having a big pile of cash to buy this competency in. Hopefully if people learn from their misteaks (hands up I am one) then this is going smoothly. Authorities might come back with some questions but a good outfit will turn this round and the clock starts ticking again.

I'm thinking that if UK doesn't get off its proverbial, the Us will issue EUA for any test that hits a minimum standard - no worries for Avacta.

Did I mention, I mention the US at the start of October. Really should have done it from top of my donkey.

I heard it in McDs

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/business-valuation.asp

Tell us your assumptions

Tell us your inputs

That will give you a value.

Change your assumptions, adjust your risk discount.

Rinse and repeat.

Start with
number of patients (over time)
% diagnosed
% treated
% market share
Average selling price
Discount (time value of money)
Apply risk factoring (sensitivity)

Let us see your working

We can then disagree infinitum

If the question is will this rise more or less than 10x the answer is yes.

Since I am a lazy *** does anyone know what the safety data from previous trials looked like. I ask since if that is the next stage we may have enough evidence to predict finding.

Has it passed efficacy. Truth is we don't know. We know it hadn't failed - otherwise would be rejected with others.

Safety data is a fairly quick review - effectively list different body systems and some automated stats. Complication will be deaths since working with a high risk group with multiple confounding factors. Therefore is there a signal and then some expert interpretation.

Looks like we will know one way or the other within next couple of weeks but could be anytime.

Fingers X'd. GLA

In my experience with suppliers we always like to have at least two. That is about risk management, stalking horses etc than about capacity.

I think it is great that two suppliers will have validated QA on production batches. AS had an opportunity to provide numbers a couple of weeks ago and didn't. I haven't seen any financial forecasts from Avacta matching the scenario described.

My one view is that Avacta probably cannot match the price point to win large (and I mean very large) contracts. Furthermore, they don't have HUA.

I therefore think current developments are to cover both a base case and best case scenarios for when (if?) HUA arrives. The additional capacity gives Avacta room to grow Rather than being matched against any sort of order book. Just being realistic and there will be no-one happier than me if I'm wrong.

Think we can all chill - been said before but the story has moved on from LFD which even if it happens will not deliver the £Bs some (incAS) have alluded to. Life goes on.

Take some facts. Make up some facts. Throw in the biggest number you can think of. Add it all together. Post as often as your little fingers can cope with.

Then claim that others are deliberately disrupting board. Very clever.

Or very funny

I'm not sure which

Never let the evidence spoil a good story

$2.436 B if pre- AVA006 initial read out.

I'm not qualified to calculate ex-China

Ex-works so I wonder if same for Chinese. If so need to add CIF.

Can we pin this at the top?

Who are the big institutions - they also.hold some clout and will want to see a return.

Right now I'd accept £2 but as people say given the timeline it is unlikely anyone will be compelled to do anything

Are funds able to hold Bermuda stocks at the level they are - that said it presumably counts as a NASDAQ stock.

DG

Thank you. That is incrediy helpful.

I'll think I will do the same and just hold - my view is this is either a dog or a multi bagger and until we know one way or the other I'll let smeeoing dogs (or not) lie.

Owe you one.