Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Angle Plc LSE:AGL London Ordinary Share GB0034330679 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  3.00 2.71% 113.50 112.00 115.00 113.50 107.50 110.50 775,488 16:05:47
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology 0.8 -13.7 0.0 - 245

Angle Share Discussion Threads

Showing 55576 to 55600 of 55600 messages
Chat Pages: 2224  2223  2222  2221  2220  2219  2218  2217  2216  2215  2214  2213  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
14/5/2021
00:09
Now what is your chart etc. Telling you?
l0ngterm
14/5/2021
00:08
Supporting news profile: response to fda, new contracts, ovarian cancer results, any new contracts.
l0ngterm
13/5/2021
23:54
If you can project a 2 year share price in a speculative share, I shall bow down. Short term 6 months 2.50+ on fda approval, £4+ with 1 large commercial contract (large definition as AZ or Abott/quigen deal or large CRO). All three £7.50+
l0ngterm
13/5/2021
23:15
Amazing how everyone bites, when prompted. SK,Bermuda, Mia et al. None of this deflects from your investment or holdings, it does make sure that dazzle doesn't have to do his home work. ;-)
l0ngterm
13/5/2021
23:08
pldazzle, the evidence that surgery on ovarian cancer patients helps improve the prognosis, and the more that is removed the better, is overwhelming: hTTps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19189349/ hTTps://ijgc.bmj.com/content/27/4/668.abstract hTTps://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/fulltext/2006/01000/Aggressive_Surgical_Effort_and_Improved_Survival.14.aspx hTTps://www.bgcs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/BGCS-Guidelines-Ovarian-Guidelines-2017.pdf There are a raft of other publications.
sicilian_kan
13/5/2021
22:50
pldazzle - Worth remembering that this trial recruited patients from 2001 to 2005 when treatment options for ovarian cancer were pretty dire and way before approval of the Bevacizumab or any of the PARP inhibitors. Perhaps the answer to your concerns is provided by the authors of The Lancet paper when they discuss the limitations of the trial:- ' In addition, most screen-detected women were diagnosed and treated more than a decade ago, before many of the advances in clinical management (eg, widespread use of ultraradical surgery, earlier treatment modulation based on better prognostic indicators, and targeted therapies), which could have improved outcomes.' 'In retrospect, second-line tests could have been further optimised so that time to diagnosis after an abnormal screen was reduced. Finally, clinicians could have been encouraged to intervene earlier when faced with rising biomarker concentrations and normal imaging'
bermudashorts
13/5/2021
22:40
Guru, Exact Sciences Market Cap is $16bn, Guardant is $11bn, Grail is being bought for $8bn etc. I think Angle should be in the $2bn - $8bn region in 2 years' time.
sicilian_kan
13/5/2021
22:39
thanks gibso6767
sicilian_kan
13/5/2021
22:06
Some outstanding posts and repartee today , Thankyou all . Question if a person was on a Parsortix machine akin to kidney dialysis how would this affect CTC’s ie reducing them and or show CTC growth rate as it happens ?
gibso6767
13/5/2021
21:54
SK - You write: "Does surgery on ovarian cancer patients help to improve the prognosis. The answer to this question is yes." If that's the case, great. But are you saying that the extra 47.2% that were found to have Stage I ovarian cancer in the MMS test, per the Lancet report, didn't have surgery? Or not by a specialist cancer surgeon? Per contra, if they did, then how come there was no statistical improvement in the outcomes? Outsize - Excellent post.
pldazzle
13/5/2021
21:38
If everything goes to plan and the FDA approval is granted, what does the future hold for Angle share price? Median price in the next 2 years?
gurunostradamus
13/5/2021
21:38
Hi Sicilian Kan , I have posted the link you provided earlier on lse ty and mentioned yourself
gibso6767
13/5/2021
21:26
s-k, or anyone else of course - how does the Parsortix test compare with Foundation One? https://www.foundationmedicine.com/test/foundationone-liquid-cdx
supernumerary
13/5/2021
20:30
pldazzle: - There another huge benefit to using Parsortix that the Lancet didn't touch on, that would skew their results and studys completely. Namely that Parsortix will give you the CTCs to culture, identify, profile and the potential to trial the cancer's CTCs against multiple drug/treatments, BEFORE the Cancer Surgeon has performed the operation, imho vastly increasing the chance of a positive outcome.
outsizeclothes.com
13/5/2021
20:25
And we hope to us.
eeza
13/5/2021
20:14
pldazzle , you are conflating two completely different things. The Lancet study shows that mass population screening (which Parsortix is not intended for) does not assist in patient prognosis for ovarian cancer. It is potentially not helpful for those involved in the ctDNA industry, which Angle is not. Angle has deliberately avoided going down the mass screening route. There is a completely different question however which this study has absolutely no bearing on. Does surgery on ovarian cancer patients help to improve the prognosis. The answer to this question is yes. It is long proven that patients whose tumors have been optimally debulked, have a better outlook (prognosis) than those sub-optimally debulked. It is also well established that this surgery should be done by a specialist cancer surgeon. Equally it is important not to send people with abnormal pelvic masses to specialist ovarian cancer surgeons who don’t need one if the mass is not cancerous, as set out in my posts above. This is precisely what Parsortix does and it does it better than every other testing method. It has value to the patient, the doctor, the hospital and the insurer.
sicilian_kan
13/5/2021
19:26
Great example of the longitudinal testing that AN discussed and highlighted, 000,000s of tests. Even more so when you think rather than annual tests, it could be taken more frequently and a more detailed analyses of the disease conducted, progressions understood and hopefully better treatments could be developed. By using parsoritix.
l0ngterm
13/5/2021
18:09
miavoce - All points taken. But: From the Lancet report - "Between April 17, 2001, and Sept 29, 2005, of 1243282 women invited, 202638 were recruited and randomly assigned, and 202562 were included in the analysis: 50625 (25.0%) in the MMS [multimodal screening] group, 50623 (25.0%) in the USS [ultrasound screening] group, and 101314 (1.0%) in the no screening group. Compared with no screening, there was a 47.2% [...] increase in stage I and 24.5% [...] decrease in stage IV disease incidence in the MMS group." To me that looks pretty impressive diagnosis-wise. And given that the trial used CA125, the statistics for Parsortix testing should work out even better, perhaps considerably so. But it won't necessarily do the patient that much good if what they are now saying is "no matter whether you are diagnosed at stage I or stage IV, ultimately your prospects of survival are much the same either way." This is in no way intended to knock miavoce's points above (although to my mind the jury is still out: won't the patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer via MMS screening have been looked after by a specialist cancer surgeon, subject always to NHS limitations?) That said, I entirely see the potential economic attractions of Parsortix to insurers, particularly in the USA.
pldazzle
13/5/2021
17:20
The Angle ovarian test is aimed at identifying the 5% of women whose pelvic mass is ovarian cancer so that they can be operated on by a specialist cancer surgeon rather than a general surgeon. Cancer surgeon = much better outcome. Benefits:- 1. Better outcomes for those women with ovarian cancer who will now be operated on by a specialist cancer surgeon rather than a general surgeon 2. Less wasted time for cancer surgeons operating on women whose pelvic mass is not cancer and didn't need a cancer surgeon 3. Avoided ongoing health service expenditure treating women who had ovarian cancer but were operated on by a general surgeon rather than a cancer specialist
miavoce
13/5/2021
17:14
hashertu That was more or less my reading too (and my knowledge/expertise (or lack of) is on a par with yours). Hence my query!
pldazzle
13/5/2021
16:49
Parsortix may be an improved offering regarding screening tech?
semper vigilans
13/5/2021
16:46
pldazzle. Lancet report. I have minimal knowledge or expertise in this field. If I had to hazard a guess, that report was another way of saying that the treatment options were not very effective, whatever the stage of the disease (the opening paragraph said "poor prognosis"). The report was not a criticism of the screening process per se. It was more an acknowledgement that if there is nothing you can do with the screening results, why bother screening.
hashertu
13/5/2021
16:13
SP remains very resilient on tough days, hard to see it not going higher soon.
banshee
13/5/2021
11:47
pldazzle, take for example the following from the end of the previous Parsortix ovarian trial: "Compared to CA125 for the ANG-003 samples, at a high sensitivity the Parsortix result had nearly double the specificity of the CA125 result."
sicilian_kan
13/5/2021
11:16
So many practical uses that will help inform treatment and save on both biopsy costs/dangers and targeted drugs costs/effectiveness. You would have thought insurance companies will probably insist on test (wave) before agreeing to fund top end cancer drugs some that cost into the $100,000 a year. All points well made SK
waterloo01
Chat Pages: 2224  2223  2222  2221  2220  2219  2218  2217  2216  2215  2214  2213  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
AGL
Angle
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20210514 02:02:42