Member Info for smeeagainbruce

https://www.pointbiopharma.com/press-releases/esmo-2022-poster-data
PNT poster on SPLASH trial results , and new FRONTIER trial PNT 2004 Pan cancer programme targeting FAP.
PNT has shown it has the technology to treat cancer patients and hopes to improve the performance using CanSEEK.
AVA 6000 will soon imo prove pre/CISION works and therefore PNT will have in CanSEEK a game changer in Radiopharmaceuticals.
Exciting times ahead in the fight against cancer.

Muck 165 recently raised the new FDA initiative Project Optimus which concludes, MTD is no longer acceptable, not appropriate for the new targeted drugs. Dose finding studies are too time consuming and will prevent patients from QUICKLY getting drugs they need.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvRUyBjh3D0 ( 42 mins in new approach discussed - Nivolumab )
The FDA has demonstrated targeted drugs is the way forward and it looks like Roche was first to the table. Being first in this case imo does not mean you are the best.

Good Therapeutics / Roche, focus on the generation of a new class of drugs that offer potent activity only where it is needed. Antibody sensor directed against a specific marker PD-1-regulated IL-2 receptor.
AVA 021 - PD-L1 Affimer.
Looks like that old Affimer v Antibody contest. My money is on the underdog.

https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/curidium-medica-plc-announces-strategic-partnership-with-b-takeda-research-investment-inc-b-/
Avct bought Curidium therefore Takeda will own shares in Avct, 50,000 to be precise as listed.
Is it not that simple, no hidden agenda imo.

https://www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/?ACT=18&ID=1720
Takeda held warrants when Avct bought Curidium way back in 2009.

https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/comment/pluvicto-approval-point-biopharma-psma/
Point Bio are about to go into competition with Novartis, both using Radioligand technology and both using 177Lu-PSMA- 617. Novartis has FDA approval PB about to disclose result of trials and as both similar in content it would be safe to say PB will receive FDA approval.
The link above gives Novartis the edge however PB has the technology to change the delivery using pre/CISSION. The same technology being applied in AVA 6000, the only difference being two separate treatment methods, Chemotherapy / Radioligand.
Avct claim pre/CISSION Chemistry can be used to modify a Radioligand drug, is there separate patents out there to cover these two treatment techniques?

gmcc, interesting find you called to attention PB to publish Abstract at ESMO Congress, Abstract is titled Efficacy & Safety of 177Lu-PNT 2002 prostate cancer (mcrpc). This drug has FDA & UK approval and is used by Novartis in their Pluvicto trials for the above cancer.
Does this mean the difference between the Novartis trial and the PB Splash trial is in the delivery process (CanSeek v Pluvicto). If so would this not be very exciting news or am I misunderstanding the technology.
In the Webinar, Understanding the PNT 2002 Splash Trial two key speakers are listed, one being Dr Oliver Sartor. He led or co-led multiple National & International Clinical studies including 3 Radio pharmaceutical phase 3 studies pivotal for FDA approval in Prostate cancer. Lu-177-PSMA -617 being one of them?
His involvement imo speaks volumes.

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jcm.02479-21
Here is a list of approved FDA LFTs , note their ability to detect the super spreaders against what is considered people with a high viral load. Now if anyone can produce a test capable of identifying the super spreaders who spout a lower viral load, would this be classed as a winner ?

Remember that boat as it vanished over the horizon taking with it the expectations of massive sales in LFTs, well the Yanks have boarded it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fda-says-three-negative-rapid-tests-needed-asymptomatic-covid-rcna42734
According to the recommendation made by the FDA they will need another two boats to sail in. Interesting how the statement made by AS suggesting testing will be around for years to come appears to be coming true.
He also said re-developing the test to restore that performance and in doing it in a manner as robust as it can be too future variants.
Why did he make this claim, could it be because Avct know a lot more about the virus. The antigens of interest and because the Affimer in the test is un-effected this has taught them quite a lot. Which epitope, which part of the antigen is least vulnerable to mutation so we can apply some thought to generate a second agent. One that gives us more future proving going forward. Full steam ahead.

A very shrewd Company realising the potential of pre/CISION chemistry. In comparison Novartis paid $2.1 billion for Endocyte to drive forward their new delivery Pluvicto.
https://pharmaphorum.com/news/novartis-pluvicto-gets-first-european-approval-in-gb/
Novartis buy a company, PNT licence the technology, tick tock tick tock.

https://www.genengnews.com/magazine/320/validating-anti-idiotypic-binders-for-trastuzumab/
Conclusion says it all, Affimers v Antibody Drug Conjugates.
Mersana delivery platform DAPK 3 / STING signaling using ADC xmt-2056 a large Antibody v Avct delivery platform using teeny weeny Affimers which appear to work excellently. Add on the progress made by AVA 6000 and bingo, or am I missing something here ?

https://autolus.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/autolus-therapeutics-present-three-novel-cell-programming
Autolus Theraputics or AffiXell looks like she has gone for the winner.