Evgen Pharma Share Discussion Threads

[aoifesweb] 16/1/2019 16:31

Getting worried about the results now with the slow trickle down in the price, especially with it being open label. Are insiders selling out I wonder

[pdt] 11/1/2019 21:25

I thought I would have a look at another company in the Nrf2 activation area, Reata Pharma



The stock price has tripled this year and it has a market cap of just over 2 billion dollars. :)

[pdt] 11/1/2019 20:23

I think EVG have had the lead in SFN for a while now but competition is starting to emerge;



Note the research is by GSK in both US and UK.

Perhaps it is encouraging others are actively researching SFN or will EVG simply be left behind?

[l0ngterm] 08/1/2019 17:26

Thats what is throwing me here, as looking at the interim RNS, the response was only four patients out of 20 at the 24 week scan.The company had 43 patients at that point, then a month later 50 and stop.To hit the 20% of the 50 ,then 10 patients would have had to responded. If they hit 12 then no point in carrying on as that would cover the target response rate of sixty patients.The other way round then four patients responding was never going to be enough, for the 43 on the trial or the 50 when recruitment stopped, or am I missing something else?

[nobbygnome] 08/1/2019 16:53

But you only know the positive result at the end of the 6 months period of treatment and so at any one point, certainly in the middle of the trial, there will be lots of patients ongoing for which you don't know the result. So what you are suggesting is not feasible IMHO.

[spmc] 08/1/2019 16:09

They way I see it longterm is that when they looked at 50 patients they were just about on track to to hit the 20% but the response rate was dropping off so why take the risk of recruiting the extra 10 patients as it could push them under the required 20%, it only takes one less responder in the extra 10 to push them under the required 20%. As them hitting the 20% is widely expected because of the interim readout I don't see the shares rising much on results, maybe will settle at 18-19p. For me the big risk is that they drop under 20% I think the shares will crash. I'm mainly in for the stroke trial results as that's the big unknown so will move the share more, I sold half my holding a couple of weeks back incase they drop under 20% I can buy back at a much cheaper price for the stroke trial results.

[pdt] 08/1/2019 11:37

They mentioned in the interims that a review of the benefits of targeting Nrf2 would be published soon and I see it is now available online;



There is a small charge to download the full article which I may do later. I suspect they may make it available on their website at some point.

[l0ngterm] 06/1/2019 22:55

I am happy to be called all sorts, but someone tell me if the maths is wrong here?

[l0ngterm] 06/1/2019 22:45

Then the company hired experience in both m and a, and funding..

[l0ngterm] 06/1/2019 22:35

Hey I don't know more than anybody, so I go on mathematics.You said 10% and ap said 20% based upon the companies advisers etc.The adviser say stop at 50 recruitments, if 10% that is only 5, if ap is correct then that is 10.If the overall figure is 20% then that means that the companies advisers stopped recruitment because, out of the 50 they already had a significant response to meet the 20% of sixty.at the interims the company had been 20%, based upon 20 patients at the time.So what changed, when the advisers said stop at 50 and have enough evidence?

[nobbygnome] 06/1/2019 22:23

Sorry haven't looke at the thread for a week. It was Dr Sacha Howell who said 10% would be enough and he is the clinical lead on the trial and breast cancer expert. But hey, you know more than him obviously!

[l0ngterm] 06/1/2019 21:29

Thanks PDT

[pdt] 06/1/2019 14:24

I see the poster from the US Breast Cancer event is on their website



I don't think there is anything new except that it notes that recruitment onto the TAM and FULV streams were slow and they put that down to possibly the widespread use of Aromotase Inhibitors.

[l0ngterm] 03/1/2019 18:10

Nobby, I am particularly interested in your thoughts. As my understanding (right or wrongly), that the trial had three streams, each a combination. Could one stream be more successful than another? Possible a 20% in one stream, overall could be just 10%?

[l0ngterm] 03/1/2019 16:57

Interesting conversation guys.whats your thoughts on the below update. As it reads to me that the company are stating that the trial has been successful, 50 patients recruited etc. RNS was released on the 27th if july 2018. A month after the Hardman update posted below. (Link below for RNS). Note the advisors etc have stated sufficient evidence. "STEM is an open label trial that had regulatory approval to recruit 60 patients. Following the favourable interim read-out, announced on 11 June 2018, the Principal Investigator and the Company's medical adviser believe there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the main aims of the trial, being a favourable safety and tolerability profile and evidence of clinical benefit, have been successfully met. On this basis, the Company has decided that there is no merit in recruiting the full number of patients allowed under the protocol.As at 24 July 2018, 50 patients had been enrolled in the trial. Any eligible patients currently in screening will also be admitted to the trial."http://otp.investis.com/clients/uk/evgen_pharma/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=1240&newsid=1124664

[aoifesweb] 03/1/2019 10:15

@Nobby Please stop lying, please see the below report which is published on Evgen's website:



At the bottom of page 6 it says:

EVG has been told by its clinical advisors that if at least 20% of
patients have their tumour growth halted for the 24-week duration of the study,
then they will have an interesting option for this hard-to-treat patient population.

10% will be no way near enough 20% is the minimum, 10% is around the number of people who's cancer starts to respond without SFX-01 so in a phase 3 trial 10% is about where the placebo response rate will be which is why the clinical advisors stated that 20% was needed. There will be no progression of the drug in breast cancer below 20% and that is a fact, please stop your lies as you will be misleading other investors.

[nobbygnome] 02/1/2019 17:31

>> aoifesweb

Both timbo and I attended both the research day in November and the Proactive presentation in June. I discussed the trial at length with the CEO one to one after the presentation so I guess know much more than you about it. The clinical trial lead (Dr. Sacha Howell) who presented at the research day was clear that with even a 10% response rate, they have a serious drug on their hands which will be progressed.

But hey WTFDIK, you are clearly the expert!

[timbo003] 02/1/2019 17:00

>>>spmc, had the response rate been 30%, I suspect the share price would be multiples of where it is now, I am quite happy with where the price is now, as it provides an opportunity to top up at a price which does not really reflect the risk reward profile IMO

>>>>>aoifesweb, as a Surrey based shareholder, I think it was probably beyond the call of duty to attend an AGM in Manchester, especially as the Research Symposium was due to be held in London a couple of months after the AGM.

[spmc] 02/1/2019 15:18

Even if we do manage to hit 20% there’s nothing to say the market won’t react the same way but were starting at 17p this time so could drop to 10-11p :(

[spmc] 02/1/2019 15:13

You can tell the 20% we hit on the interim update wasn’t considered good enough by the way the share price reacted. We dropped from 25.3p down to 17p. The market know’s the margins are so fine now it’s basicaly a coin toss for the final readout. I would have been much happier if their had been 30% plus responders as there would now be more room for error.

[aoifesweb] 02/1/2019 15:06

If you actually bothered to attend the AGM, Stephen clearly stated we need 20% for the drug to be progressed. Why people invest in companies if they can't even be bothered to attend the AGM I will never know. And I wouldn't believe someone posting on a BB board that claims to be a patient, never base any of your investment decisions on what is posted on a BB

[nobbygnome] 02/1/2019 14:23

Actually the oncologist expert said a 10% response rate would be enough for him to progress the drug. Plus we know there is at least one more responder after the June update from the patient who has posted on here. The bottom line is that if the overall response rate was say 17.5%, we still have a serious drug on our hands. Don't forget this is in patients who failed most if not all other treatments; it is likely to work much better in earlier patients! Plus they have a whole other indication (SAH) where the MOA is different so not directly linked to the breast cancer result.

So if you are concerned about your investment, then I really don't think this is the sort of company you should be invested in anyway. It is all about risk/reward and clearly you don't really grasp this!

All IMHO and DYOR....

Nobby

[pdt] 02/1/2019 13:52

Interesting article about SFN and anti aging properties;



I can imagine if we all keep taking the broccoli sprouts we can attend a future Evgen AGM looking like teenagers ;)

Happy New Year.