Member Info for RorkesDrift

Look at the return current approach has made on the affimer IP. Value of ava6000 is not just the science but the companies ability to convert that into cash. The Dx splurge of £millions was meant to be the pivotal moment but someone forgot to check patent so now company under cash pressure of their own making. Alright to ignore SHs cause we dont know whats occuring but need to deliver or changes will happen. Just getting on with itband not boosting is not a comms strategy. However, might still deliver and not overly worrying until second half of 2024

I think they will get there but will probably be led there by the short and curlies by BP.

Https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_standoff

BP have had a look. Evidence is we can see some twittering and others buying shares. There is enough noise to capture bus dev teams attention and FAP is a hot topic.

Have they looked and don't like what they see. If they have been limited to what we know, not enough to make a call either way. The promise of a move to P2 would suggest promise is there but we are still in P1 - the two week dosing is an extension rather than the new study that was suggested.

That leaves interested but haven't jumped. Two probabilities. Putting a TO to one side the most likely deal is licensing of 3996 or their own molecule. I got the impression from the lets squeeze the word optionality in as much as possible interview , that they are pivoting to the later. Whichever, there is a benefit to the purchaser of waiting -data becomes clearer and the pressure on avacta increases.

My concern is that the company are playing Mexican stand off whilst following a program that has seen a p1 study change format several times and is taking years to complete. Whilst they do that they blow a load on a failed Dx strategy which was pulled at last minute. I look to chairman rather than AS to put right - sounding right and delivering are two different things.

Https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04969835?tab=history&a=3#StudyPageTop

You have to look at what this p1 Pk study was designed to investigate. You would think the presentation would reflect that purpose. Said before that I believe its because nice juicy paper and a tour of scientific meetings is more of a priority, reflecting the academic ambitions. As a say look at the number of papers on affimers coming out of Leeds since Avacta have had the IP and compare it to the P&L.

My tuppence worth

1. Past performance is a good indicator of future performance. How long have they had affimers, what have they achieved

2. The chairman needs to do his job as much as AS

3. Lot of effort put into slides but came across as a one sided edited highlights. The basic pK data was missing, the number of cycles per patient missing, etcetc. Market infers what are they hiding

They keep banging on about drugs that are so toxic you cannot give them systemically. Then Novartis post well done.

I've run it through the magic calculator .....

My assumption is the University of Avacta want to keep the data - including the primary pK which was the whole point of the study, back in order to be able to publish it. Wouldn't want to be thought of as boosters or put off IIs with a high SP

In other news watching the four pom pom girls on twitter is excellent. I can almost hear the clip clop of tint hooves.....

OK I am calling an emergency meeting at McDs.

Price dropping because of what is not said - too many holes in data - hopefully AS has couple of hours to add to his script

His lordship is not a pom pom girl. More Widow Tw4nky

If you ignore the four pom pom girls and discord posts you wouldn't find many avct posts on social media.

I'd agree they do more damage than good since the messaging is based on such obvious flawed assumptions that any potential investor immediately assumes that coupled with the volume of posts there is a pump and dump going on. Thar just adds a level of caution to their thinking.

Given the effort they put in they could have a bigger impact if they stuck to facts stated by the company and put down the magic calculator. Less trips to McDs to play dress up as someone in the know would have no impact other than to remove a clear opportunity for p155 t4k3

Bfdinvestetor - makes perfect sense. Fits with results expected to have a big impact otherwise you would just wait until next round, sell off your options, buy an extension.

Market is waiting to hear about the patients that have done fantastically well. Only other reason I can think of is meeting with fda the day before.

Also about the whole treatment population. Patients vary. Tumours vary. Results will vary. Once all the data there the biotech will be able to evaluate. That's when the pivot to and the potential success of the P2 might make sense - its a niche market but could get ava6000 to market and then act as bridgehead. Also might reflect financial constraints / ambition

Number of cycles - how many patients received 1,2,3 cycles etc

Cross reference this to cumulative systemic dox exposure.

%of ava6000 converted to dox

Cross reference this to total tumour exposure

Compare the above to normal dox - modelling

Most companies have roles such as business development and their job is to interact with each other. After initial meet up normal to move to nda for more robust discussions. Suspect avacta has initial stages complete and will follow up post Dec 13th. Avacta not too bad at it given current partnerships.

Think the multiple references to weeks tells you enough about the investment strategy and motivation. Even if all the hyperbole turns out to be correct then SP will go up in steps over months and years- why would you take SP in a couple of weeks even if the BbC run a Newsnight special as is suggested.

Once again we have a fantastic opportunity to raise questions which can then be ignored.

Hopefully this meeting will be followed up by one of AS garden parties for selected people - rumour is lse members have been barred for bring informed yet unruly.

Feels like angels dancing on pins. The change to a phase 2 study is exactly that - a change from the original plan. Not sure why we cannot take that has a sign of confidence in the phase 1a data the company can see but we cannot.

Fda approval would be an endorsement of the data. Lack of approval is not the opposite but rather regulators making sure drug companies progress in an incremental fashion. We wouldn't be the first company told to go slower and some of them went on to make £Bs. Plan A is still a plan that leads to commercialisation.

The only bit that puts a spanner in the works is AS is the second worse person at estimating timelines. Should step back and leave that bit to Fiona. I find adding six months to anything he states would still result in disappointment. Roll on the New Year.

Now if that doesn't bring on the ground breaking RNS we are hoping for then my magic calculator needs new batteries.

Not sure the fud is out of proportion to the magic calculator.

It is ava6000 that is being administered. Not dox. If 100% is converted then a equivalent dose is valid.

One patient has been reported has having significant tumour shrinkage. Several others remain on treatment. Very positive news. Not a cure for cancer.

Patients in cohort 3 experienced side effects. Presumably higher doses too. Not side effect free.

Ava6000 is a new compound. The belief is it will be superior to dox in both efficacy and tolerability. It moves the goal posts from keeping tumour in check (progression free but limited by toxicity and therefore time) to something which reduces tumour, enables more effective combined therapy and huge step forward in tolerability. Charge what you like - the benchmark is not standard dox at that point and even if it were the cost benefit analysis has to include the benefit.

It's a discussion board, not a football fan zone. Visit twitter for that.

Thx.

As you say AffyXel involvement but not clear why. Must be some tight bonds.

Look at me, don't look at me.

I guess this board can substitute for care in the community for awhile. Good to see preparations for panto season are I place but make sure exit stage left is not blocked up with old McDonalds packaging.

He has a farm you know...

Not so sure. Feel is it works really well in some patients. One has had tunour shrinkage whilst other patients remained on ava6000. Big decision to leave someone on an experimental therapy so the impilcation is it delivers benefit.

I expect what the market needs to see is a definition of that patient group. If itsva sub-set of STS then its not really the cure for cancer the magic calculator assumes. My feeling is that the truth is somewhere inbetween but thats not a fact for IIs. As for side effects we know its not without them and its dose dependent. AS says its great but again needs facts. My take the therapeutic window has been radically changed and if commercialised ava6000 will change the treatment of active fap tumours. Market just needs a bit more hard fact.