Member Info for Size82

I'd take 5 weeks time, but as stated yesterday's RNS could be anytime this summer.

Very true Docdaneeka

Nail on the head there Aether

I reckon you be right there Tommy....

Sp movement over the past couple of days a joke.... mms having a field day lol

Doc83,
I think a favourable jv licencing deal with big pharma could be negotiated if platform trials don't materialise. Activ 2 data would help further, but I don't think "the future will look very bleak" as you mention. A bit of perspective. A week ago we received outstanding deep dive data. The market is just being impatient in my opinion.
All ears on the presentation and Q&A.
GLA

Doc83,

I posted the following yesterday so I'm not surprised by today's update other than it being late this a.m. which felt a bit unprofessional.

"I'm not expecting any new info on strategy to be released tomorrow as it feels like they have already informed the market of their intention (I.e. further platform trials which will lead to eventual commercialisation). Until govt. Funded trial ruled out i dont expect a JV / licencing deal with big pharma. We might receive an update on finances, but I'll be pleasantly surprised if we receive anything else. Surely they'd have released Activ 2 data or news on platform trials if already known?! To-date there has been no mention of an EUA application (post sprinter read out in Feb.) so can only assume that's not happening. Again, will be pleasantly surprised if this is raised."

IMO the new base case scenario is good Activ 2 data and a platform trial (which could be ended early). On the back of the platform trial I see commercialisation and potentially big bucks. Patience is required, but i still see the end game being the same as pre sprinter read out.
Anything else prior to platform trial completion like an EUA application, T/O attempt or JV with big pharma is a bonus. GLA

I'm not expecting any new info on strategy to be released tomorrow as it feels like they have already informed the market of their intention (I.e. further platform trials which will lead to eventual commercialisation). Until govt. Funded trial ruled out i dont expect a JV / licencing deal with big pharma. We might receive an update on finances, but I'll be pleasantly surprised if we receive anything else. Surely they'd have released Activ 2 data or news on platform trials if already known?! To-date there has been no mention of an EUA application (post sprinter read out in Feb.) so can only assume that's not happening. Again, will be pleasantly surprised if this is raised.
GLA

Doc, see it as an opportunity and buy more, rather than finding it depressing. I'm confident this will come good. The longer the sp remains supressed the more shares I'm able to buy....
Just my take

Axe C, thanks for clarifying and good to hear!

Won't those centres already be working on drugs / treatments, and prioritise those?

Thanks for clarifying, very helpful. Fingers crossed then

Disapointing not to be on the list / awarded funding

Thanks for sharing Tommy. I wonder how long a platform trial would take, what level of priority SNG001 would receive and the required sample size to make sure trial is robust with no chance of it being underpowered etc.

* I should add - I get your frustration though Axe

Well said Docdaneeka, yesterday's results should have been all over the US & UK mainstream and financial press today. Maybe its a hot topic amongst the scientific community at the ATS, but the lack of media coverage feels like another missed opportunity.

Given all the concern over SoC / steroids 70% really is astonishing.

I think this is one we're going to just have to be patient with and trust the Synairgen team (and hope large shareholders are applying pressure). Cream rises to the top, but the lack of a sp rise was surprising.

Ghia, fair points and maybe you're right on timings, especially if Synairgen continue to go it alone. Re your point: "Science clearly worked but I get the feeling it’s too disruptive to the major pharma co drug pipelines". Are you insinuating they'd try and block the drug from coming to market and if so how?

IF SNG001 has the potential to be that disruptive (via competition) then surely that means it has significant value. As a result you'd think the big pharma companies will be all over this for a T/O attempt or a licencing deal to get in on the action?!

Patagucci, this is my take and stand to be corrected. I think what it shows is that steroids / oxygen / general improved SoC helped two thirds recover without the aid of further help. The p value of 0.11 for the 37% reduction in progression to severe illness / death would have turned significant if the trial was bigger and there hadn't been so mamy protocol viliolations. The primary end points were impacted by the SoC and high number of patients recovering quickly from the base line SoC.

Importantly, to those that needed helped (as reported today) the steroids appear not to have reduced the effectiveness of SNG001. So to answer your question the evidence suggests mixing steroids and SNG001 doesn't stop SNG001 from working where the body needs help. I believe this is critical as hospitals aren't going to stop administering steroids s part of the SoC.

Thanks Brand, that's a very pertinent point. Good knowledge

Following extract:

"These analyses showed stronger treatment effects with SNG001 in these high-risk patient sub-groups, with the strongest effect observed in those who had clinical signs of compromised respiratory function. In these patients, who represented approximately one-third of the SPRINTER trial population, SNG001 significantly reduced the risk of progression to severe disease and death compared to placebo by 70% in the Per Protocol population (Odds Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) 0.23 (0.06, 0.98); p=0.046)".

Now We are talking. Warrants an EUA IMO for the at risk groups and a platform trial for other categories of hospitalised patient.

The sp should re-rate significantly.

If you search the list view there is no Synairgen stand. No idea why the change or what it means.