Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. Watch the video here.
Always seem to be in a closed period!
Hopefully not today. For the first time in 2 years I'm selfishly hoping they do their stuff so I have a better opportunity to average down.
Sales needed to be in place by 13th February. Medical liason reps were to have been presenting the economic case by now. Does no news on these plans imply mtfb are negotiating an alternative plan of global licensing or buy out?
How much fine tuning does it need? Further analysis of results demonstrated Europe cohort (65% of the total trial) showed statistically significant reductions (71.1% vs 48.8%, p=0.0218) compared to placebo plus standard of care in patients who were anti-dsDNA autoantibody positive. Approximately 60-70% of patients diagnosed for Lupus are Antibody Positive. This taken from their RNS of 29th May. So net is that in Europe (which includes Mauritius) they achieved the top line results at the required statistical level of significance for a cohort that is at least 60% of the market.
Most of those trends do not look good. Biggest culprit seems to be US.
Ivy, thanks for the link. So on top of all our other positives, we have a novel mode of action that mitigates resistance. Are we in a good place or what?
Tobias, great article link. Jimbob, now better able to make sense of your posts too. So what stops the fusion reaction? You're making profits. Your steering fund is still intact.u As free float reduces your efforts would be more effective. So what draws a line under the activities?
Oops wrong board sorry
Tobias, great article link. Jimbob, now better able to make sense of your posts too. So what stops the fusion reaction? You're making profits. Your steering fund is still intact. As free float reduces your efforts would be more effective. So what draws a line under the activities?
I have tried to judge how close is the funding crisis. My answer surprises me given the noise on the board on the issue: Cash year end 16/17 £5.536m Gross profit this year from research sales £5.187m Operating costs this year less tax credits (£6.767m) Cash year end 17/18 £3.956m I have assumed operating costs same as last year but undoubtedly bigger given increased studies. However, research sales could well be very healthy: Machines in use 2016: 90 Machines in use 2017: 145 (both from company) Machine base'growing rapidly' which I take to be at least continued linear increase of 55 p.a. Company comment in brackets may indicate much stronger growth and would be expected given the volume of novel and insightful research results that other labs will want to repeat/build on. Separations todate 30,000 (from company). Average machines 16/17 around 118 so separations per machine per annum about 254 (ignoring separations prior 16/17). Incidentally this averages <5 separations per week per machine. I understand current capacity is not much greater than 2 per machine per day). So: New machine gross profit in 17/18 @ £28k per machine (company) & 55 machines: £1.54m (assuming none are try now buy later or leased) Cassette gross profit in 17/18 @ £83 per cassette (company), average of 173 machines, 254 separations per m/c pa: £3.647m (assuming no freebies) Total research gross profit 17/18: £5.187m Lots of flaky assumptions but the direction of travel from company statements and above revenue forecast is clear. As a result I have markedly reduced fears about a fire sale placement. If there are fundamental misconceptions embodied in the figures, I really would like to find out! Still got fears about what is the commercialisation strategy and have we got sufficient faith in current CEO to deliver in a timely fashion.
I think the last three posts reflect my sentiments. I am positive about Parsortix and the science. I am surprised at the delays. So, I guess, are the board. They are now playing hard ball in biotech. They have had suficient time to consider that they need to up their game but there have been no changes. And my governance comment is about what might prompt some changes because AN is both large shareholder and CEO.
This is obviously much much more than a medical device and although the science appears sound we have a board which is unskilled to navigate the med tech issues. We have a CEO who is an accountant with some enterprise success, a non-exec chairman who is an IT specialist, a finance director who has no med tech experience and a non-exec director who, hurrah, does have med tech experience. I also see a governance issue which is now beginning to be felt, with a CEO who is (only just) the 2nd largest shareholder (9.43%) compared to Jupiter (9.9%). Compare this with Uber where strong shareholders demanded the CEO's removal (although he was also a major shareholder), and I see no dynamic that will suggest that AN builds the board with the necessary expertise including his own replacement. There has been sufficient evidence of poor judgement (original FDA process) and unrealistic and unrealised expectations that the quality of strategy and execution must be called into question. I await some more positive messages from prelims and webcast.
Drums, I've been doing similar sums with some different assumptions. I think the test takes quite a while and although I can't find the reference, I think a better estimate would be 3 slides per day, i.e. 2 hours per test. On the upside, they already have 145 machines in place and although many will be free/discounted consumables, they will all come into play commercially at some point. And the big research kicker is the recent announcement from Barts which opens up a new line of investigation which has to use Parsortix! So here's my sum: 50 weeks x 3 days per week x 3 slides per day x £60 margin per slide x 300 machines = £8.1m gross profit per annum at a market cap of £50m. It's a relatively risk free annuity which can only grow plus add in something for machine sales (don't know their commercial model - might be like printers and inl cartridges?) and its already a healthy business without the multibag of therapeutic applications. Next week news?
From Willfy on ADVN (and thanks to him for the good find - I expect our company will RNS this so you heard it here first): The abstracts have now been published for the ASCO Annual Meeting which will be held in Chicago in early June. MD Anderson have submitted an abstract detailing their research using the Parsortix system to try and identify a new biomarker for predicting resistance to anti-EGFR treatments. The conclusion from the abstract:- "We have successfully isolated CTCs from mCRC pts’ blood using Parsortix system. Elevated levels of arginine methylated EGFR is associated with a shorter PFS with anti-EGFR-based Rx. Assessment of meEGFR-CTCs may provide a “liquid biopsy” biomarker for reduced efficacy from anti-EGFR Rx." So the no. 1 cancer centre in the US is presenting research at ASCO highlighting the potential for the use of the Parsortix system to predict those less likely to benefit from EGFR inhibitors. So much positive stuff going on in the background here. http://abstracts.asco.org/199/AbstView_199_185418.html
Hi David, I assume you mean equivalence during first 24 hours of anti-clotting compared to first 6 months of stem cell therapy!
I am hoping for some SP movement on achieving any of the H1 milestones, although I wonder at my expectation given the lack of movement on the PISCES II trial data readout. Anyway, H1 milestones are Stroke PhIII start, CLI Phase I data/Phase II start & RP Phase I/II safety data.
Following is response from AN to queries from TrottersTrading on ADVN, which mentions FDA: A few quicks question if I may? 1) How is the European Ovarian Study progressing? I was expecting some results by now but have not seen anything published, is there a delay? 2) Numerous articles point to competition in the Liquid Biopsy space ramping up significantly, with some of the limitations associated with ctDNA being overcome, should we be concerned that our competitive advantage is being eroded and how might this impact our target market? 3) What is the latest on the FDA approval please? I’m somewhat concerned we may not be the first liquid biopsy FDA approved for cell capture and harvest, is there any light at the end of this rather long tunnel? 4) Any other positive news to take my mind off the current Share Price which is rather depressing at the moment? Andrew's Response: I agree the share price is disappointing and share your frustration. We are following a clear and consistent strategy and making good progress against the key milestones set out in our Annual Report 2016 http://www.angleplc.com/investor-information/financial-reports/ The next major milestones are our EU and US ovarian cancer studies and our FDA studies. The exact timing for reporting on studies is dependent on a number of factors that are outside of our control including the speed of patient recruitment and enrolment at the trial centres. Clearly we will make announcements on progress at the appropriate time. Based on our market knowledge, we are still on track to be the first FDA approved CTC harvesting system. Medtech applications take time to develop but the prize is very large. There continues to be strong and growing interest in liquid biopsy and CTC solutions. The limitations on ctDNA remain. ctDNA can provide some information on DNA but not on RNA and protein expression. CTCs are clinically relevant (not always the case for ctDNA) and can provide full information on DNA, RNA and protein expression. None of the clinical areas being developed by ANGLE can be addressed by ctDNA so our competitive advantage is not being eroded by this technology. The market opportunity is huge and there will be many players who make substantial returns. ANGLE’s strategy with regard to KOL relationships, clinical studies in tightly defined clinical applications and regulatory clearance is designed to provide ANGLE with a strong competitive differentiation. Best regards Andrew
Fairly recent video from Edison. Anything to get some more posts on this board! www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/edison-tv/clip/angle-plc
Price per cassette £150, Cost £17! I assume our participation in the Gannet53 study is through paid for cassetettes. With 424 blood samples to date, that's £64k of revenue, of which not all (any?) will have been reported. I guess there's the same again before the study end in 2019. Plus the 14 drugs trials with Cancer UK. Plus the sales to other research bodies. Oh and plus the sales of machines (£40k price, £17 cost although propositions other than outright sale have been mooted). Although not the main action, research sales are beginning to look very positive.
The news on both placing and contract is on their website