Avacta Share Discussion Threads

[tomzimerman] 17/9/2024 11:14

Sadly a bad day for the flag wavers

[1347] 17/9/2024 11:08

I repeat that while there were some positive aspects in that latest RNS there is simply not sufficient data to demonstrate AVA6000 efficacy, or otherwise. Basically what DB are saying is that the results are underwhelming. I tend to agree, they might show a marginal improvement over standard Dox but we have no comparator to make that judgement. Partial and minor responses aren't cutting it as far as BP & Mr Market are concerned.

Two things I noticed in the RNS that were missing. One was what the dosage was for those where there was some response, why wouldn't they state that? The second was there is no update on their plans or timelines for Phase 2, if they ever get out of Phase 1, are they just playing for time?

[pwhite73] 17/9/2024 11:07

Can't argue with that or this.



"A Phase I trial takes several months to complete. About 70 percent of experimental drugs pass this initial phase of testing."

You may need to question why AVA6000 is still stuck at Phase 1a after three years?

[rajraj b] 17/9/2024 11:02

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9558307/Conclusions: Phase 1 trials are primarily designed to accumulate short-term safety (toxicity) and pharmacological data. Although preliminary efficacy may be addressed ("proof of concept" efficacy), it is a secondary endpoint. The numbers of patients are small, the numbers of patients receiving efficacious doses are very small, and controls are absent. Evaluation of efficacy and of long-term toxicity requires longer, larger, and controlled studiesPlease note: "The numbers of patients are small, the numbers of patients receiving efficacious doses are very small"Regardless, efficacy was seen

[pwhite73] 17/9/2024 10:47

Rajraj b - "You cannot say categorically ‘ it doesn’t work’ based on a safety trial."

Technically there is no such thing as a safety trial on its own. If you administer drug A to a patient you check for any toxic and efficacy effects. AVA6000 has been administered for three years and there is no credible evidence of efficacy. Avacta's get out clause is - "well this is only a Phase 1 safety trial".

Deutsche Bank analysts are saying - "No. The efficacy information you have supplied after three years of dosing clearly indicates the drug does not work for therapeutic purposes and to be taken to Phase 2".

Speak Later

[rajraj b] 17/9/2024 10:41

If that's the conclusion they're putting out there for pension funds and global markets and they act on this dubious information then they should seek legal action for poor analysis. You cannot say categorically ' it doesn't work' based on a safety trial. But then again I'm sure already know this. Best way to look at this is that they were not expecting to see ANY efficacy at this stage given the poor candidates in the safety trial but regardless they saw significant signs of efficacy in those they were able to analyse and biopsy. That sounds much more measured. Don't you think?

[goforgold1] 17/9/2024 10:37

If you think this is the 1% that make it your wrong this is one of the 99% that fail

[goforgold1] 17/9/2024 10:36

Scam Scam French Scam . You might as well put your money on Black or Red better chance this is going bust

[pwhite73] 17/9/2024 10:33

Rajraj b - Here is something for you.

RNS 11/08/2021 - "Avacta Announces First Patient Dosed in AVA6000 Pro-Doxorubicin Phase 1 Clinical Trial"

First patient dosed over three years ago. Three years later they are still dosing patients in a Phase 1a trial.

They are still stuck at Phase 1 because legally they cannot move to Phase 2 without presenting Phase 1 data at the pharmacological level to the wider medical community in peer reviews and convincing the FDA that the results from Phase 1 are sufficient to allow the progression to Phase 2.

Those are the facts.

[pwhite73] 17/9/2024 10:28

Rajraj b - "They have to be receptive to dox and express FAP alpha."

FAP is found abundantly in cancer cells. It is responsible for tumour growth. The whole purpose of DOX is that it recognises FAP and attacks the cancer cells and kills them. The problem is once circulating in the body it also attacks healthy tissues to a lesser degree including the heart. This is why its normally limited to 60 - 80mg in a dosing session.

Its only AVCT telling you AVA6000 can administer three times that amount with no side effects whatsoever.

Deutsche Bank analysts are not ADVFN or LSE chat bulletin board posters like you and I. They advise global investors and pension funds that invest billions into pharma stocks. Effectively what they are saying is that AVA6000 does not work.

[rajraj b] 17/9/2024 10:15

They have to be receptive to dox and express FAP alpha.

[pwhite73] 17/9/2024 10:11

Rajraj b - "Would you expect it to work on patients who’s cancers are not receptive to Dox?"

All cancers are receptive to DOX. It is the most powerful cancer drug known. In fact so receptive are the patients to DOX that too much of it will not only kill the cancers it will kill the patients.

Rajraj b - "Wait for verified results of the two week trial"

What more trials at Phase 1a?. Unless the programme has changed my understanding is that all AVCT patients are end of life (terminal patients). DB have exposed the lie that I and others have been telling you for the last two years.

[rajraj b] 17/9/2024 09:48

Would you expect it to work on patients who's cancers are not receptive to Dox? Similarly, what about on patients who have developed resistance to chemo? And how about patients who have already been overdosed on dox so their cancers are now immune to dox? Use your brain before engaging. The participants on this phase 1 were full of these. And yet, they still managed to see some efficacy. Incredible stuff. Wait for verified results of the two week trial for more reliable efficacy figures as these participants will be dox sensitive patients.

[patio58] 17/9/2024 09:40

All the uneducated idiots are out today, probably PWhite's multiple accounts typing scare mongering nonsense. Just put them all on filter.

[pwhite73] 17/9/2024 09:38

vertizeasun - "Now the warheads will be refined."

In case you've missed it the warheads have been refined, aimed and fired at the previous CEO.

[vertizeasun] 17/9/2024 09:33

A success rate of 100% on pre|CISION™

59 patients treated and FAP detected in all of them....and cleaved.100%.

Now the warheads will be refined.

This is the revolution.

[pwhite73] 17/9/2024 09:20

vertizeasun - "This is a safety trial and on just that measure it has been an overwhelming success"

Yes the safety trial has been a resounded success. But we all knew this two years ago because there is no therapeutic aspect to AVA6000. The warhead is not being released into the tumour or anywhere else for that matter. That's why its safe. Always has been, always will be.

[ohwhatfun] 17/9/2024 09:18

Well now you can see why Arisaph binned it, the efficacy required for them to move it on is simply not there.
The efficacy in phase 1 Avacts trial is a non event, dismal.

It was used as hype pump post LFT failure, it reads like they are not going to bother with a phase 2 on Dox, and why bother it would be a waste of money the evidence is simply not there to support it.

It needs safety upgrades AND efficacy.

Wording was getting weaker as time went on now it’s poor at best.

The previous CEO mugged you all with his hype.

No joy in investors losing out, just anger at the company pumping it, then some lead names pumping it ignoring and avoiding clear evidence to the contrary.

When someone is worth billions, founded it and failed to continue to back it, the rat is not difficult to smell.

That meant it didn’t perform as expected, this trial is done, no phase 2 coming by the look of it.

[jaknife] 17/9/2024 09:14

fieldhouse,

"Just an analysist’s opinion ! Are they medical oncologists ?"

Are we dismissing everyone's opinion who isn't a "medical oncologist"?

So we all agree that that Myles McNulty bloke can be ignored because he's not a medical oncologist"?

Or is the reality that the longs will warmly accept the opinion of anyone who says positive things that confirms their bias but find any random reason to dismiss opinions that they don't like?

JakNife

[patio58] 17/9/2024 09:11

Another clown for the filter!

[vertizeasun] 17/9/2024 09:01

Thanks to WeAreGroot on LSE:

This is a safety trial and on just that measure it has been an overwhelming success by any clinical measure. On top of that the precision platform is unequivocally proven, again, better than expected, better even than the animal models suggested.

The fact that we’ve seen efficacy in ANY patients is just a huge bonus given the heavily pretreated patient population and the fact that many of the cancers are not sensitive to dox. Having tumours shrinking was unexpected and again shows ava6k is performing better than expected. In addition, breaking down the stroma is shown to allow the bodies natural immune systems to attack cancers generating durable responses even in fap negative cancers.

Everything is blockbuster, there are no negatives.

Ignore the favours one no nothing suggestions of an analyst doing a mate a favour, he’s not remotely researched. And don’t forget there is a clear connection between GSA and Deutsche bank.,.