Member Info for Toukankahmoon

Hi Rippers

Thought you had gone away. Nice to know you are still invested.

Sadly I was invested in a similar situation 20 years ago. The new invention threatened the “golden goose” of the big players. They just waited it out until the “new boy” went bust and then bought the IPO at rock bottom price. Had their karma though because the new technology was soon overtaken by even newer technology.

I don’t think Avacta will play out like this but never underestimate the clout and deviousness of BP.

Just saying.

For a friend.

Wow Alistair signalling another game changer pivotal moment inflexion. We all know how those have turned out in the past.

Thanks for some useful comments

Yep the market and BP are thick as mince

The problem with Al’s communications is not so much what is said but what is left out. And in the past this has come back to bite him. And it’s made IIs cautious.

I know that this phase isn’t supposed to show efficacy but publishing good results for 5 patients is always going to pose the question “how did the other 30 odd fare.”? If they responded well why haven’t we been given the data. Why haven’t we been given the data regardless.

You can sling abuse all you want but it’s this sort of communication that concerns investors. Hence SP.

Oh and I learnt that it’s not free from side effects in at least 10% of patients because of dox leakage from the site and low levels of background FAP throughout the body.

Go for it rampers!!!

13th

Thx for replying.

So does that mean 4/5 2 week cycles in the states (=P1b) to establish the dosing regime for P2 and then all being well FDA allow us to get on with it without a formal P3?

Sorry to be so thick (most would say it’s normal) but I’m just trying to get this clear in my head.

Bump

I’m lost. What are the steps to get AVA6000 into treatment of choice?

- finish C7. Is that the same as P1a

- 2 week cycle in US. Is this the same as P1b

- what has happened to P2

- does there have to be a P3

Sorry about this but various commentaries seem to contradict eachother.

With regard to computer systems, I agree that testing a program on a single threading mainframe is reliably repeatable but the human body is more like a realtime multithreading environment (of which I’ve had a lot of experience) and new systems need to be stress tested for hours with masses of data and systems run in parallel in order to prove them.

Timster

At least we have one thing in common - developing IT

Anyhoo I really am not arguing that it doesn’t work. I’m just saying the investors want to see it work on 1000s. Just suppose that a significant number of people have some FAP near healthy important organs. And here I am well out of my depth. Can anyone on here provide a reference to a large scale study of FAP distribution in cancer patients or even healthy patients?

Results may be startling but it’s only a handful of patients so far. Investors will be cautious until it’s 1000s of patients. Sadly some drugs have fallen at this hurdle. And yes I do realise that AVA6000 is delivery mechanism for a chemotherapy drug that has been in successful use for 40 years. AND I AM INVESTED AND BELIEVE IT WORKS but some people are more cautious when it comes to risking their hard earned cash.

Anyhoooo only one more sleep and hopefully all will be revealed.

Yep Al loves a bombshell Christmas RNS

Energy shares

I don’t see the average fan on here as the sort of person that reads instructions before diving in feet first.

Just saying

Watching

That message would be great but doesn’t seem to match with what Al has told estura to expect next week

Estura

Thanks for info. I’m afraid that I don’t find “We’re also mindful of not raising false hopes of a quick fix for cancer patients” particularly comforting for a treatment that is going to become the defacto treatment overnight.

Sponge

. . . and yet there it is the elephant in the room the SP

Rampers it has to go through a phase 3 trial with thousands of patients before it will be licensed. Because the chances that a significant number of people may express FAP elsewhere near healthy organs has to be minimise. If something like this was to emerge after it was licensed just because it had worked on 100 people, the impact would be enormous.

They didn’t expect to replicate the mouse trial data????

Hardly worth continuing then.

TBH the original misguided post was fairly negative.