Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Thinking about the logistics and costs involved would there be any advantage in bringing on the US site for what’s left of phase 1a? It seems more logical to bring the new sites on to contribute to 1b where they can select particular patient groups and set up the trial protocol just for 1b.
RAH - thanks so much for your quality analysis (amongst others including Ophidian) on this. If I have understood the logic we are at a stage where:
- It’s clearly not creating dose limiting toxicities to date, hence dose escalation
- Anecdotally evidence seems to back this up
- It would be highly unlikely that the trial would have continued for this long had there not been SOME cleaving (ie just letting the drug pass through the body intact)
- Therefore some efficacy is to be expected, question is just how much
Interesting on the same day that Neil Bell mentioned combinations with immuno-oncology drug agents that we get an article showing the success of exactly this kind of trial with an “experimental medicine”. Not AVA6000 as dates precede the trial start.
I have been wondering what the extent of the “product development” is. My assumption was that they would take the pro test, integrate the buffer and put some snazzy artwork on it. The more time that has passed I have been wondering whether the development is more extensive. Perhaps removing the plastic casing (a la Binax now test) or similar lower cost innovation. Pure speculation of course but an nda would allow for an exciting unveiling at product launch.
As far as I can see it’s only the Hughes Healthcare (Acon Flowflex) test that has full HUA for the UK market. EUA for Innova/Orient Gene is only a temporary measure.
The only difference in product I can see is the integrated buffer/dropper, which Mologic were also looking to redevelop. I presume our new HUA will feature this as well.
Are there any others we are aware of that have HUA?
Currently watching both Angle and Avacta (similar market caps) take different trajectories towards major news - both companies due something over next couple of months but timing and outcome unclear . Angle looking for FDA approval (which isn’t nailed on) and seems to be building nicely into this milestone (so far!), Avacta currently on a different trajectory as we know. Given we are now well into the AVA6K trial and notwithstanding bad news/a lacklustre investor day I am hopeful we start to build nicely into Q4.
So this is the week when we start talking about winter readiness, Lord Bethell comes out of hiding to talk up LFTs, whispers point towards readiness by end of the month and, tomorrow, Avacta host a seminar on “pandemic preparedness”.
Will it really be the case that after 3 months of complete silence on the LFT the first we hear from the Avacta diagnostic team is at this conference?
I can’t shake the feeling that this week (tomorrow?) we will get an update.
After the breadcrumbs being dropped in the last few days (Twitter account, reference to NHS contract, updated data sheets) I just can’t believe that news isn’t coming.
Is all of this just to prepare the ground for announcing 0/£3bn of the contract and 0/30m UK monthly supply (access to which referenced by the CEO in the last 2 updates)?
I just can’t believe that the company would be this silly.
Here is the leaflet for the Mologic test. Looks very similar to me but hard to compare illustrations
https://www.bkr-online.com/fileadmin/user_upload/download/ML210308_Covid_19_Rapid_Antigen_Test_IFU_V5.pdf
Agree - many thanks to Ophidian and Robbo.
I am guessing that the Jupiter might be that (1) Avacta management now waiting to bundle news together - as per Myles theory (2) news is still a few weeks away (3) possible flurry of non-Avacta LFT news in the near term (omega LFT choice?) to distract investors
Seems like a very risky strategy to me.
The current pro-use Avacta device leaves a lot of scope for Medusa to add their magic. Having taken the (inferior S/S) Orient and Acon tests over the last few days it’s noticeable how much better they are than the initial Innova packs; integrated buffer, convenient perforations, clear instructions.
Add in the above plus 98/99 plus the snap-off swab plus UK made and the Avacta test starts to look very attractive to a marketeer.
Timelines suggest some kind of scale up issue to be the case - however the last RNS stated “Manufacturing scale up continues to progress well” - I can’t see this statement being permitted if there is a chronic problem here.
I am still wondering whether the hold up is due to product reconfigurations (eg pre-prepared buffer, single pack units, leafleting and general kitting) required for the HUA pack.