![](/cdn/assets/images/search/clock.png)
We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Synairgen Plc | LSE:SNG | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B0381Z20 | ORD 1P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 4.65 | 4.52 | 4.99 | - | 182,565 | 10:52:51 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pharmaceutical Preparations | 0 | -17.65M | -0.0876 | -0.53 | 9.36M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
30/7/2020 07:39 | Do you need to be a level 2 member to join the guild? | morrie1234 | |
30/7/2020 07:21 | https://www.huffingt | ![]() paradise city | |
30/7/2020 06:13 | Morning Nobby. Could you send me a coin for access to the guild discussion board please? I've been in here since March with a decent sized holding. Thanks in advance! | ![]() mutley28 | |
30/7/2020 01:39 | A bit of science late into the night. when comparing and contrasting different placebo controlled trials, it is usually good to compare the 'event' rate in the placebo arms of both studiesWhich brings me onto comparing remdesivir and sng100 trials. Our risk reduction was better, than remdesivir despite their placebo arm having a higher event rate implying sicker patients (so one can speculate that our drug would have even a better benefit) Perhaps the next trial should be Remdesivir VS Sng100 VS placebo. Why? Cos remdesivir is approved! In such a trial, you would not have to prove it is better than remdesivir, you would only have to prove it is non-inferior to Remdesivir, so number needed would be similar.Interesting times aheadBTW Astra Zeneca is probably reviewing the data from the study, and will know if there is enough data for regulatory approval. A tie-up would be logical | torreskid | |
30/7/2020 01:34 | Give our British researchers some credit. The UoS Respiratory clinicians, would have been very diligent in their work, and have a lot to lose if the trial was done improperly, regardless of the outcome. We await peer-reviewed and that is imminent, then publication of the scientific data, then regulatory approvalThe only fly in the ointment that I see is this question of preexisting condition of diabetes, and randomization should have averted that, but it happened, and was probably due to the size of the study. Perhaps a diabetic only study would potentially clarify this. | torreskid | |
30/7/2020 01:02 | You forget DEMGAre we talking about the same Nobby ? | torreskid | |
30/7/2020 00:03 | waterloo0129 Jul '20 - 23:50 - 11882 of 11884 0 2 0 Bensdad2 I'm afraid that the lack of advfn moderation of these threads has led to an exodus to a more protected board in the guild. Not a situation I relish but while not all the posts are considered that's where many post and discuss. Not here alas but one only has so much time to have it wasted by ignoramouses I`m afraid that advfn still allow free speech on their platform. However they do allow groups of likeminded RAMPERS who are afraid of alternate views to play in their own playground where adults are not allowed and they can drink as much pop and eat as much ice cream as they desire. | ![]() monkeywench1 |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions