Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Wow - I missed this bit with all the excitement.
The emerging positive safety and pharmacokinetic data from the study support the potential clinical differentiation of AVA6000 over doxorubicin. This includes: (i) higher dosing of AVA6000 compared to standard doxorubicin, (ii) more frequent dosing of AVA6000 compared to doxorubicin - doxorubicin is typically dosed every three weeks in order for patients to recover from the side effects of treatment, (iii) the ability to administer many more cycles of AVA6000 compared to doxorubicin.
Several patients remain on trial in different dose cohorts and continue to receive AVA6000 as their disease has not progressed
Major inflection news right there.
End of life patients and disease is not progressing.
Unbelievable
If the rumours are correct I think it's likely we are bringing on a new II (s) (big raise to sticky strategic partner) and the 10-20m referenced is for PI, management etc (sim to last raise) hence the leak.
All costs covered (and more) all the way to phase 2 and an II that will support achieving full value come confirmation of efficacy at end of phase1b.
The prize at that point is multi billions so not worried at all about raising now if it ensures we achieve full value at end of phase1b.
If major funding (I suspect through license) was not 100% nailed on, then this would seem a strange move to me.
I am therefore 100% sure we have a license deal in the pipeline. Perhaps the DE extension is being driven by new partner.
Hi Rah, Jive et al,
This is exciting. From what I can gather from the AVA6K data released thus far (dox is dox...) we look like a much much safer bet (phase 1b and 2 looks to be procedural (dox is dox, the MoA has been proven already).
Question then...
How did Prometheous command such a high value? Anything Avacta can learn here ? How can we ensure that the pre|Cision Tech achieves a similar value ?
Does the BOD have enough power to bat off starting offers in the billions? Is the current register (packed full of PI) educated enough to bat off multi baggers?
MrRip,
100%. Very silly/Ill informed to be anything other than 'all-in' at this moment.
While there might be other stocks offering short term vs avacta, I'd love to hear of any share offering this level of risk vs reward over next 3-12 months.
Covid was a bad time but it attracted me to avacta and that's going to result in a life changer event .
There is no placebo arm. There will be 3 arms:
1: 24 x patients dosed with AVA6K at Dose level 1, 12-18 cycles
2: 24 x patients dosed with AVA6k at Dose level 2, 12-18 cycles
3: 12 patients dosed with Dox at 75mg/m2, 6 cycles
If you consider the above, success of phase 1b looks nailed on and PIVOTAL for the AVA6K success.
RAH,
That single STS patient was clearly not susceptible to Dox. They had never received an anthracycline previously. So unlikely that patient would show efficacy.
Not true. Simple answer could be that this patient preferred/chose quality of life (e.g. no straight dox/chemo) vs taking straight dox to extend life by xx months but with terrible quality of life due to side effects.
Rah
On the STS patient - I’ve speculated the same. Did a single (from 19) STS patient cause Avacta to chance strategy? Or did it confirm their decision
Well something gave avacta the confidence to drop all other cancer types and focus all effort on sts.. this was not the original plan. So yes, I think outstanding data from the sts ch3 patient shaped our forward strategy.
RAH,
1 of the trial patients, sadly at ‘end of life’ received 8! cycles (circa 6 months) of AVA6K prior to any disease progression, unacceptable tox, withdrawal for other reason or max exposure to dox. Correct me if wrong but this would not have been possible unless Dox was released and behaved exactly like Dox. At end of life, Stage 4, Metastatic Disease, disease would have progressed in <6 months without any therapeutic.
I speculate that this was the STS patient (102-023) from Cohort 3. Why? Well it would explain why Avacta doubled down their strategy on STS and why Dr Tap travelled to the UK to participate in the Avacta science day. Referring to slide 84 from the SD, there is a 50% chance one of the biopsies sampled related to STS and my guess would be patient 102-023 based on the Dox biopsy reading, coupled with Avacta/Dr Tap bullishness. Question: why for C3 is the data presented as ‘preliminary’ whereas C4 is final?