Member Info for sadoldgit

Sneckieboy you have been negative on this share for months. Don't try and kid people. What has changed your tune all if a suuden? If we can break through blah de blah.

Yourself, Utah, Kat Strangler, Star whatever done nothing but disagree for months. You need to learn to read and get an education then you might understand what us going on. Clearly the 5k purchaser never took any notice of the absolute non factual ineffective tripe that you post.

Your posted tripe is for the benefit of who? That Spurs lad or rainbow teeth as Ahfam so affectionately calls him.

Good morning Krone. Good post.
As far as l know research carried out by M Garrett indicated a general superiority over Prexasertib certainly superior in safety profile.

A license agreement with a few modifications should not take long to write up. As you say the data needs to be understood by all parties concerned.
A slight complication here is putting a value on 737 in areas outside of LDG, PD-1 and Wee1.

There is vast scope to increase development out side these areas

We have a minimum.of 10 year patent life left just on the compound alone. Plus oral route of administration
Minimum of 30 million upfront with significant milestone payments of 800 million plus. Of course we would only receive 27.5% of this.

Whatever way it goes should help.the market cap

Regards

Bobbler, still good and that one does give details of the other inhibitors. From memory 737 was 100 times more selective over CHK2.
Regards

I will put this excerpt up again from around 3 months ago

Study co-leader Professor Michelle Garrett, previously a Team Leader at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, and currently Professor of Cancer Therapeutics at the University of Kent, said:

"Our study shows the potential of targeting DNA replication for adding to the effect of an existing drug that blocks a system that helps respond to DNA damage.

"It's exciting too that detecting tumours with low levels of B-family DNA polymerases could be used to identify patients most likely to respond to a CHK1 inhibitor, presumably because of natural weaknesses in DNA repair within these cancers.

"The next step is to develop new drug candidates that could be used to target B-family DNA polymerases in combination with the CHK1 inhibitor SRA737, as we have shown that this could open up a potential new therapeutic approach."

Regards

It is an accelerating market. Many of the new drugs are aimed at treating DDR ( DNA damage repair) pathway.
P53 is present in over 50% of solid tumours. However we look at it not one size fits all here.
CHK1 if we look at to some extent fell on its feet years back
As a single agent it will not eradicate cancer as works at point of cell mitosis ( the division of an old cell and the creation of 2 new cells). It can control progression up to a point.
Cancer cells are not apoptotic ( to you and me they have no programmed cell death)

We can to a certain extent control replication by the CHK1 via P53 checkpoint.
Chemotherapy and radiotherapy create destruction of cells and mutations in the DNA. These
DNA mutations can be identified and iradicated by CHK1 inhibitor.

Down side is the P53 checkpoint gene becomes mutated and the cancer can develop resistance to this form of treatment.

CHK1 and a chemo has improved effects of chemo and vica versa chemo has increased the effects of a CHK1 inhibitor.

Good results have been yielded.

CHK1 with PD-1 and CHK1 with WEE-1 have also yielded good results. These results nigh pale into insignificance with efficacy when also combined with LDG. However the toxicity of having 3 inhibitors need looking into further. More selective use of a particular make here. as an example :-
Prexersertib exhibited slightly better effectiveness in some areas, at the same time were very poor at higher dosages in comparison with safety and toxicity of SRA737. CHK2 can also present problems.

Now since there are alternative treatments developed in the fight against cancer PD-1, PARP,
WEE1, P13k. AKT and many others it is becoming very well known that no 'one treatment does it all. Some of these treatments are not new and been around years.

Certain combinations of treatment will compliment each other and lead to far greater efficacy.
737 has been well researched, very well researched.
Form an orderly queue is not out of the question.

Standing in the queue if you want it for nothing is.

There are journals produced which cost around a thousand dollars for membership per year Some double this). As Tim an co can keep up to date on a competitors developments, then so can the competitors keep up to date on what Sareum have and everyone else.

What is ceratinly not wanted is a small upfront payment promises of big milestones followed by the same game played by SO. It would not be hard to believe that a company could take on the license and sit ot on it for the benefit of a competitor. That big business.

Maybe why Eli Lilly put time constraints in their agreement with Acrivon. ( no actual dates given just dotted out)

Good afternoon Celtic007.
Acrivon developing CHK1 combo LDG, looking at combo with Wee 1 too
As are the Chinese ( already in clinical trial ( pretty sure they have been approved for clinical use in China]) with their version of CHK1 but looking at combo with LDG, WEE1 and Parpi

The other candidate that Acrivon has is a PKMYT1 inhibitor which looks promising but at early stage.

Whilst not the actual Acrivon product the link below will describe the similar inhibitor by Repare Therapeutics.
https://aacrjournals.org/cancerres/article/82/12_Supplement/5650/700010/Abstract-5650-RP-6306-a-novel-PKMYT1-inhibitor

Much development in all areas. In some senses SO have done well but must not forget that for whatever reason they have delayed 737 development for 3 years.

Link below of the Chinese knock off copy from someboby I think

https://topic.echemi.com/a/chk1-inhibitors-bibert-pharmaceutical-class-1-new-drug-approved-clinically_85250.html

If we look at 7.mins 50 in and 54.00 minutes in. link at bottom of post.

54 mins in relates to return timescales and review.

The Genetic information here is of the upmost importance. This may take a day or so or up to a month dependant on how much 'Sierra Oncology have trolled through it.'

To put that into perspective
Sareum /CPF and any interested party will be analysing that data as a means of determining which patients may benefit from this from 737 and LDG, Affectively tou will create end points. typically looking at overall survival rate and degree of tumour reduction.

In contrast we now have Avricon that have obtained license for Eli lilly prexasertib. Their ace in the hole is their development pf proteomics in accessing whether a patient is likely to be responsive to the treatment of a CHK1 inhibitor after proteomic analysis,

Early results on prexasertib from Eli Lilly were around 15 to 20%. Insufficient in reality of Eli Lilly developing further.

By selectively assessing patients for suitability this success rate should increase dramatically enabling success in P2 and P£ stages and moat likely resultant commercialisation.

Patent life is nigh extinct as prexersertib began development around 2001. Protection here is most likely to be the method of selectivity of patient assessment reliant on their proteomic expertise.

Only 5 million was paid upfront to Eli Lilly. There will be milestone payments but these figures have not been disclosed.

Furthermore in a not too detailed look through the contract, all new patents and IP after this licence would not be returned to Eli Lilly as a result of termination of a contract by either party. ( very unlike the CPF/Pronai Therapeutics licence.)

We can choose to look at it effectively that to continue development with an inhibitor by Acrivon it is only costing an upfront 5 million. Acrivon had no problem raising, and in fact were over subscribed to raise 100 million dollars ony 5 month after receiving the on licence

I may be totally wrong about this, butI am thinking that there may be a remote possibility of a play here for 737 by Acrivon.
737 has a better safety profile than ACR-368, reached a later stage of development, has a patent life extending to 2033 and can be administered via the oral route.

They are also developing albeit in early stages a Wee1 inhibitor.

There certainly is growing interest in CHK1 with the advent of in combo therapy

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/investor/meeting/annual-general-meeting-66

Take also into account the amount of research undertaken since 2019 in combo therapy of CHK1.

Acrivon have the only CHK1 inhibitor in the Western word approved for Phase 2 clinical study.

To be pedantic prexasertib is a CHK 1 and CHK 2 inhibitor due to its lack of selectivity.

Regards

Acrivon paid 5 million dollars upfront payment. Not much at all. There are milestone payments but non disclosure of amounts.
Eli Lilly has first refusal on whether to buy back.

License agreement shown below

https://contracts.justia.com/companies/acrivon-therapeutics-inc-15369/contract/256548/

We still need to take into account the following

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/research/attacking-drug-resistant-tumors-sierra-s-struggling-chk1-blocker

What would be the point of issuing an RNS confirming all data has been returned?
This would surely indicate that there would be a period of decision making.

Tim stated in AGM the options would be rapid on licence or further development prior to on license.

Would it not be better to evaluate all data with CPF of which can then be decided on the pathway forward ?

In this sense I believe we will receive an RNS along the lines of following the recent return of 737 to CPF and reviewing the data a decision has been made to :-

737 is now offered as an on licence to interested parties
Carryout further development prior to on licence
We are delighted to inform you that an on licence has been agreed between blah de blah

Notwithstanding SDC compounds, I wonder how much PH or other MM know of what is going on.

Regards

Enough from me.
Good indication here of potential value in CHK1 inhibitors. I am of the very strong opinion this is leading to the gradual head north of Sareum.

Have a good weekend all.

Take a good look at links below
Acrivon have a WEE1 inhibitor and anothe compound for proposed use in combo ut at early stage.

https://www.marketbeat.com/stocks/NASDAQ/ACRV/#:~:text=Acrivon%20Therapeutics%20-%20ACRV%20Stock%20Forecast%2C%20Price%20%26,%2B0.24%20%28%2B1.68%25%29%20%28As%20of%2001%2F27%2F2023%2012%3A00%20AM%20ET%29

https://www.evaluate.com/node/18391/pdf

https://www.benzinga.com/news/22/11/29823624/board-member-at-this-health-care-company-buys-42-37m-of-stock

https://www.etfdailynews.com/2023/02/02/acrivon-therapeutics-nasdaqacrv-trading-up-1-2/

Good afternoon Celtic007
What is baffling me is how such an inhibitor as Prexasertib intravenously administered, with little to no patent life protection left was obtained from Eli lilly. No mention of deal size or Royalties. In my mind of thinking I would suggest that no up front fee was paid but is backloaded with high Royalties and commercialisation milestone payments. I will hunt further on this.

Acrivon has now a circa 400 million market cap for what? I can only see Prexasertib ( now ACR-368 in their pipeline.

Very roughly speaking.
From this do we deduce that the value of Prexasertib to be circa 400 million?

Now Edison revised their valuation ( increased market cap value of SO)
originally 120 million dollars based on 1 in 6 chance of success with 737 and LDG in combo with the chance of maybe in combo treatments.
6x 120 is 720
At a later stage they maintained a price of 120 million million based on a 25% chance of success.

That figure indicates a worth of 480 million dollars at that time.

Acrivon have raised net 99.4 million dollars for progress of prexasertib it would very much look like 5 months after licence agreement and later received FDA approval for Phase 2 studies.

A list below of inhibitors and their status
https://www.evaluate.com/node/18391/pdf

Ahfam3 take into consideration that 737 has reached dose limiting completed via their 1A and 1B trials.
It may be just pure coincidence that 737 had ceased development around the time that Eli lilly had granted Acrivon world exclusive rights to the licence and enabled Prexasertib to be granted FDA approval for stage 2 trials late last year.
Everyone knows everyone in the pharmaceutical world. many of them sit on boards as advisors to big pharma. Results were filtering through in 2020 with effectiveness of a CHK1 inhibitor in combo with LDG in SO clinical trials. Acrivon looks to have picked up on this with no other CHK1 inhibitor apart from Chinese CHK1 inhibitor.

We are far more selective of CHK1 over CHK2. Many fold more.

737 is advantageous over prexasertib in that it has a superior safety profile with the added benefit of being administered via the oral route. From a commercial point of view 737 has at present patent coverage up to 2033 for the compound itself. Prexasertib originally from 2002 Array bio has little to no patent life left. 100 million raised by Acrivon that was over subscribed.

Patient profiling will yield better results of that we can be sure.

All looking good for 737. There will be persons in the know of developments of that we can be certain.

Regards

Columbo mode, 'just one more thing' if you listened very carefully in the AGM meeting it were stated about looking at genetically selecting patients, for a better response rate, in addition development particularly in combination therapy. Very similar to Acrivon approach,
patient selectivity and profiling has also been mentioned in previous RNS's.

Regards

Absolutely HbD and Warthog4, they will have access to journals with all latest developments in oncology and immunotherapy. Costly purchase prices to of up to and over a thousand dollars for membership, way beyond the means or justification for the comparatively small investor.

Recent developments of Phase 2 FDA approval late last year can only be beneficial to the 737 compound.

Regards

interesting read. Acrivon a relatively new company (2018) Can find very little in their pipeline with exception of their CHK1 CHK2 inhibitor, market cap just shy of 400 million dollars.

They have selective profiling ( inclusive of biopsy samples) which should indicate the likely hood of success in patient treatment. Results in this measure should yield better results than Eli Lilly's circa 20% response rate.

Mush development work was researched by M Garrett on CHK1 inhibitors that includes 737 and ACR-368 ( formerly Prexasertib)

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/acrivon-therapeutics-secures-100m-to-give-eli-lilly-cancer-drug-another-try-fund-2-solid

Regards and news maybe closer than we think.

from late November 2022
'Acrivon and the Array gift that keeps on giving
author
Jacob Plieth
Even after being sold to Pfizer, Array Biopharma lives on. The latest example of the former biotech’s scientific genius, responsible for such assets as Mektovi, Braftovi, Vitrakvi, Tukysa and adagrasib, can be seen in the newly minted Acrivon Therapeutics, whose IPO got away yesterday. Acrivon’s lead, ACR-368, is none other than prexasertib, a CHK-1 inhibitor that had arisen from a 2001 collaboration between Array and Icos. Lilly later bought Icos, but discontinued prexasertib in 2019, a year after Roche canned a rival Array-originated CHK-1 inhibitor, RG7741. But now Acrivon reckons it can build on the “deep, durable, single-agent” responses generated in a few subjects by using a predictive gene signature test to identify the 30% or so of ovarian cancer patients sensitive to prexasertib, and thus deliver remission rates above the 15-20% seen by Lilly in an unselected population. Though Acrivon priced its float at $12.50, well below its $16-18 range, at least the IPO got away – no mean feat given the current market, and that Acrivon is effectively recycling a discontinued asset that has no meaningful patent life. Mid-stage data from a trial using the predictive assay will come in late 2023.
'no meaningful patent life'
A question here is does the 737patents in combo have any effect on development of ACR-368?
What is the value of 368 in its current position taking into consideration the 100 million dollars ( that was over subscribed) raised for funding ?

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/11/11/2332569/0/en/Acrivon-Therapeutics-Closes-Oversubscribed-100-Million-Series-B-Financing-to-Advance-its-Innovative-Precision-Proteomics-Platform-and-Clinical-Oncology-Pipeline.html#:~:text=Acrivon%20is%20a%20clinical%20stage%20oncology%20company%20leveraging,in%20development%20of%20its%20pipeline%20of%20oncology%20drugs.

Very similar at development stage to 737
https://acrivon.com/pipeline/

There is no information I can find on the deal arrangement between Eli Lilly and Acrivon.
No problems in raising funding I might add.

Regards

I have been contemplating if Tim and co are aware of CHK1 developments.
No mention in the AGM.

Forgot to add from 2022.

https://acrivon.com/news-press/acrivon-therapeutics-receives-fda-clearance-for-innovative-phase-2-trial-to-stratify-and-treat-ovarian-endometrial-and-urothelial-cancer-patients-based-on-predicted-sensitivity-to-acr-368/