Angle Share Discussion Threads

[htrocka2] 14/1/2025 17:18

TRLS Trellus Health Plc 4.95 725.00% 4.35 3

[zeus19] 14/1/2025 16:14

Making yourself look like an idiot as usual

[bobbie121] 14/1/2025 11:58

htrocka2
Now 400%

[htrocka2] 14/1/2025 09:24

IMM were up 200% after news item..TRLS also up 200% after news item..

AGL still waiting for their news item.

[gooosed] 13/1/2025 19:57

Of interest perhaps, if only for the inclusion of Angle plc :

[kryptonsnake] 12/1/2025 15:09

bones posting at 3am can only mean one thing

He's desperate to get back in

You've been deramping Angle since 7.5p bones. How is that going for you?



sent from my iPhone

[bones698] 12/1/2025 03:00

Zeus im afraid ome is coming wether you like it or not . The question is at what prices will it be at . Can they come up with some positive news prior to it to make it less painful or will it be another low raise . They will need one to get the results signed off it's obvious to anyone who can read a set of results . Wether they can lift the share price sufficiently before hand to mitigate the lower placing price remains to be seen

[zeus19] 10/1/2025 18:04

Stop embarrassing yourself you daft mug

[havinthelasttoast] 10/1/2025 16:39

Some under water dreamers here not waking up and smelling the coffee yet.

Another placing anyone ?

[pldazzle] 09/1/2025 13:29

seball - I decided to ask AI the exact opposite question (tongue wedged firmly in cheek...) and got an almost identical answer. I used perplexity.ai in this instance, as distinct from ChatGPT:
Q:
Why is Parsortix inferior vs plain old FACS and/or EpCAM antibodies/chips and in general any of the other platforms.
A:
Parsortix is not inferior to other CTC isolation methods like FACS or EpCAM-based approaches. In fact, it often demonstrates superior performance in several aspects:
Higher recovery rates: Parsortix showed the highest median recovery rate (66%) compared to other methods like Ficoll/CD45 (55%), RosetteSep (30%), and EpCAM-based systems (23%) when testing multiple clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) cell lines1.
Label-independent isolation: Parsortix captures CTCs based on size and deformability, not relying on specific surface markers. This is advantageous for detecting CTCs with low or absent EpCAM expression, which is common in ccRCC1.
Lower leukocyte contamination: Parsortix demonstrated the lowest number of contaminating leukocytes compared to other methods, resulting in purer samples1.
Versatility across cancer types: Parsortix has shown effectiveness in isolating CTCs from various cancer types, including breast, prostate, and lung cancers12.
Preservation of cell morphology: Parsortix-enriched cells maintain their morphology, allowing for further analysis and characterization3.
While Parsortix may have lower recovery rates compared to CellSearch in some studies (21.3% vs. 76.3% in one esophageal cancer study)3, it offers advantages in capturing EpCAM-negative or EpCAM-low expressing cells, which are missed by EpCAM-based methods1.
The choice of CTC isolation method depends on the specific research or clinical context, but Parsortix has demonstrated significant potential and advantages over traditional methods in many applications.

While this is certainly articulate and reads interestingly, at the end of the day I'm not sure it tells us all that much, other than about the slightly sinister power of AI to regurgitate what it can scoop up from Google.

[boris cobaka] 09/1/2025 10:40

Wonder how that pilot study is progressing...
This is the kind of thing agl needs to be part of.

hxxps://ir.recursion.com/news-releases/news-release-details/recursion-announces-two-key-investigational-oncology-drugs

[millwallfan] 09/1/2025 10:22

Thanks everyone for the reminders on FDA history - but why then with all the evidence available from independent experts have AGL not pursued the 510 route to secure market control over the other most prevalent cancers ? This technology is life changing in terms of both early identification of metastasis (biggest killer by far) and for targeting treatment so it is a disgrace it has not been widely adopted as the industry gold standard. Some years ago the consensus was the major drug companies didn’t want quick solutions as it reduced the ridiculous profits from requiring multiple drug trials - but that argument seems long gone.

[seball] 09/1/2025 08:15

Q.why is Parsortix is superior vs plain old FACS and/or EpCAM antibodies/chips and in general any of the other platforms.

Parsortix offers several advantages over traditional methods like FACS and EpCAM-based approaches for isolating circulating tumor cells (CTCs):

Unbiased Capture: Unlike EpCAM-based methods that rely on a single surface marker, Parsortix captures CTCs based on their physical properties (size and compressibility). This is crucial because CTCs can be heterogeneous and may lose EpCAM expression during metastasis, leading to their escape from capture by EpCAM-based methods.
Intact and Viable Cells: Parsortix isolates CTCs gently, preserving their integrity and viability. This is essential for downstream analyses like single-cell sequencing, gene expression profiling, and functional studies, which require intact and viable cells.
No Antibody Interference: Since Parsortix doesn't use antibodies for capture, it avoids potential issues like antibody-induced cell activation or masking of epitopes, which can interfere with downstream analyses.
High Purity: Parsortix provides high purity CTCs with minimal contamination from other blood cells, improving the sensitivity and accuracy of downstream analyses.
Automation and Standardization: Parsortix is a semi-automated system that can process multiple samples in parallel, providing standardized and reproducible results.
These advantages make Parsortix a superior platform for CTC isolation compared to traditional methods, enabling more comprehensive and accurate CTC analysis for research and clinical applications.

[jelenko] 09/1/2025 08:06

The other thing to remember is that customers with a certified Laboratory can use Parsortix for any application they feel comfortable with. So the FDA approval for MBC effectively rubber stamps the device in terms of it's effectiveness for all cancer types. I don't see any need myself in doing all the work required for other cancer types when AGL can already work with all cancer types in their own lab and in reality as mentioned above so could all hospitals subject to their staffing numbers and knowledge.

[bermudashorts] 08/1/2025 20:13

The cost of gathering clinical data for a pan cancer FDA submission would have been enormous. It's worth remembering that Angle's De Novo approval in metastatic breast cancer resulted in the FDA creating a completely new device classification and in effect Parsortix has become a predicate device. Future FDA submissions should be able to go down the 510k route which requires the sponsor to demonstrate that the device for that particular indication is as safe and effective and substantially equivalent to the predicate device. This will be a much quicker route and should require less data.

[radderssandy] 08/1/2025 19:24

I agree Jelenko & Waterloo, it was the FDA that advised AGL to concentrate on a specific cancer indication. The below quote is from the April 2023 Investor Meet presentation.

“ …. what we have is an FDA clearance in metastatic breast cancer. Just sort of recapping, when we approached FDA initially, we suggested that we could have a pan cancer clearance because the system does work, without modification, in all different cancers. They strongly advised us against that in the first instance, because they require detailed information on every single cancer and it would just make the whole process even more complex…..R21; (Andrew Newland)

[waterloo01] 08/1/2025 18:17

They didn't fail but were strongly advised by FDA to go cancer by cancer. I've been wondering and did ask, without reply, if the New FDA might make a second swing at wider approval more likely.

It's just the sort of thing a Trump appointee might well 'liberalise'? One can dream..

[jelenko] 08/1/2025 18:16

Millwallfan,Angle were told to do this by the FDA themselves. The error was listening to the advisor that initially told them to apply for "rare cells in blood" approval, that wasted time and money.

[blenny2] 08/1/2025 17:14

millwallfan - AGL initially applied for the "generic" approval 8 or 9 years ago and failed.

[thiopia] 08/1/2025 16:47

Chart is setting up nicely. Bring on the news


free stock charts from uk.advfn.com

[millwallfan] 08/1/2025 16:27

ST. certainly looks a potential area to pursue - but our marketing team should be spending 100% of their time scouring the entire cancer landscape for potential partnering opportunities. Also as I have raised before - and nobody has ever answered - given the efficacy of the core Parsortix system is proven beyond doubt why cannot FDA approval for other cancer types be fast-tracked ??
From memory ANGLE were advised early on to just seek FDA for a single cancer types ( breast cancer) rather than ‘generic’; approval - perhaps with hindsight that was very poor advice ????

[havinthelasttoast] 08/1/2025 13:06

No they are hiring because all the good staff are jumping a sinking ship and they sick of worthless stock they were getting paid in.

Hope that helps