Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Hi Theburg-Although I'd like to accord some positive significance to this additional phrase(and initially did so), I think we should recognize that the implication of the entire statement(left unstated)is, "assuming the results are positive."
In essence, he's saying, as any CEO would, that he hopes the results are positive, so the program can move forward.
But Hey, that was my first instinct too, and it certainly in no way suggests that the trial isn't likely to be successful, so I'm reconciled to going with that!
Agreed...The earth wasn't flat and it wasn't the center of the universe, etc., despite the preponderance of public opinion
Absolutely warrants a major LOL!
If you're right about AVXL(and I think you might be), it could turn out to be the perfect pairs trade!
The "market", as I said, just generally isn't aware of the fundamentals and/or the potential...
And, with each successive post, it's all too obvious that neither are you
Most people still aren't paying attention...
Some that are paying cursory attention are inclined to employ the same type of superficial market analysis that just "screams" lack of attention to the relevant data sets, as well as the supporting pre-clinical work, like your own.
However, despite the massive market downturn of last few days, there's also obviously a certain number of more discerning players that are accumulating, which explains the relatively large volume and recent price stability/outperformance.
NTRP vs AVXL-> Not much to say here, except that the market seems pretty clear on which of these has the most NT potential Quit a nice relative accumulation day!
Regarding the Alkon Rebuttal-When it's difficult (if not impossible) to argue the substance, procedural objections-the last refuge of critics, are, as in this case, sure to follow
I think we really need to close/stabilize above $5.50 to signal a clear change in direction though...
Certainly within the realm of possibility...That's Bullish!
So if I understand you correctly, you're saying, assuming the same proportion of 20mg memantine free patients completed this confirmation trial as did the previous phase 2b(which was a lot more than any of the other cohorts), the 95 completers reported(88% completed) is just what you'd expect.
Yes that definitely looks like a major efficacy signal to me too(and, like so many others here to date, another extremely hard data point to explain away)...
Thanks so much for noticing!
Somebody(s)finally getting religion re: NTRP...Pretty significant accumulation today...definitely has the look of a bottoming/reversal...
Thanks ITT-Very thorough and concise summary of the Shareholders Meeting...Much appreciated!
Well I hope they do-because when you see a move of this intensity(along with a bunch of other similar bios-AVXL,etc.)on no news, you can generally bet that its a coordinated trading hit that is usually entirely unrelated to fundamentals...So, really nothing to do(if you're invested) but either sit tight, or buy more.
My only regret is I didn't realize it would get this ridiculous, or I would have reserved some cash to buy this up
This is definitely a bear raid, plain and simple, propagated on the backs of holders who don't understand either this process, or the value of the securities they hold(really would be so much better if people like this just stayed on the sidelines)...way oversold now, and won't last long here...btw, options exp tomorrow pm...
I concur regarding max likelihood of double bottom test(or worseover the next day or two...
Options Pressure confirms it(Max Pain =$5 strike) http://maximum-pain.com/options/max-pain/ (put in NTRP for 7-19-19 and submit),
However, NTRP has very strong support in the $6.20-$6.60 range, plus, beginning to get oversold, so may very well bottom there: https://www.stockconsultant.com/consultnow/basicplus.cgi?symbol=ntrp
Hey runncoach, I'm frankly amazed at the general level of detailed discussions and insight on this board. I used to be more active on Ihub a few years ago(just came back), but I don't remember any of the boards I was active on being this good.
Although brevity has it's virtues, I find this to be a relief from twitter(where most of the real info is communicated via private messaging).
And yes, pretty much everyone here seems fairly realistic about the odds-In so much as I view it as reasonably well-informed speculation,I'm definitely in the "role the dice" camp myself.
Where I differ though, is that I have a pretty large position(including call spreads, common and straight calls)at about a $6.70 cost basis(relatively latecomer)- so I'm hoping I'm the vanguard of the next wave here
And I definitely would feel a lot more nervous about my prospects if I believed all the indicators some have suggested provide any indication that the trial is likely to fail. IMO, they don't for the reasons stated.
In fact, in view of all the negative bias regarding Alz research, microcap bios, and a somewhat dubious PR record here to date, you might conclude the fact the MC isn't even worse suggests the opposite.
However, due to experience, I stick to my assessment of the data in context, and it obviously looks good enough to me to stick my neck out, relatively speaking. So, good luck to us all,(as well as the patients)!
btw, if you've just gone thru essentially the same thing in an AXSM, as I did(distrust of all Neurocognitive meds, company coming off a failed trial, etc.), it's easier to understand how this can happen.
And then there's the options expiration issue...
Therefore, though the trial may or may not fail, price here, IMO and experience, means nothing
Price here means nothing,
except that several KOLs probably know the odds look good, but how many fund managers believe KOLs in this sector IVO their level of predictive validity the last 15-20 years...
And since those who don't believe haven't looked, and they have little or no confidence in the KOL class in general regarding the sector, and resulting price only confirms their skepticism(not to mention an occasional ill-advised smear from the likes of Derek Lowe), we've got a perceptual catch-22 going on here, which only good data can(and I'm predicting will)rectify...
and another ghastly example of just how extremely inefficient the market can be...
Or, so time will tell
Re: Derek Lowe, Phd, the author: As of 2018 he was working at Novartis; formerly he had worked for 10 years at Vertex, 9 years at Bayer, and 8 years at Schering-Plough
IVO these associations, not to mention the article, I'd suggest his motivations are rather dubious.
If you want a better understanding of why NTRP is trading down here, take a look at this smear: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2017/05/03/neurotropes-shameful-pr-stunt
This could be/Will Be the way it begins, should the confirmation work...
Whispers here and there, that, all of sudden, Explode to the surface, never again to be denied...
Kind of like the UFO phenomenon...Of course, there have been much more than a few whispers for such a long time re that one.
But, just like that one, I'm going to posit that a true Bryostatin Breakout is very likely in the offing!
I like your technical analysis runncoach. Nicking the $5 range sounds right to me. People will eventually take advantage, regardless of the options Max Pain reading...it usually only provides general price pressure info.
I wouldn't go that far, but, personally, I think one problem with this type of PR, is that it suggests the Tr was completed, but doesn't provide topline data, but more importantly, doesn't provide any updated guidance about when topline will come out.
I know we discussed this before, but the idea that a relatively small trial is done in early July, but you have to wait till mid to late Sept to get topline strikes me as at best, strange.
I'd guess I'm not the only one.
Nevertheless, $5 range(for any protracted period) seems a stretch.
Ok-Yeah that makes sense. Options Market-maker wise, should see significant price improvement after July 19th...which makes this next few days an excellent buying op for those that still need to accumulate
I'm not sure how we will cyosol-since the oral and poster presentations are on July 17th, and unless I'm missing something, they're only going to outline the old data and new confirmatory trial structure, not the final data.
So, not sure we'll know anything definitive by then
If you think the NTRP news is good today, you may find the price action more than a little paradoxical. However, if you consider the options (Max Pain) situation(for NTRP, July 19): http://maximum-pain.com/options/max-pain/ , which motivates market makers to push the price temporarily toward $5 (in this case),
plus bear in mind how easy it is for market makers and big traders to move around such a small daily volume, to pick up cheap common and/or calls, the situation isn't, IMO, nearly as concerning,
And basically says nothing about the probabilities of the outcome
Oh Thanks, Never mind-now I see it!
Hi runncoach, Where does it specifically say 95 completers for the confirmatory?
Thanks
Thanks! According to this, we've got a way to go, but at 27%, more Institutional ownership than I would have expected at this point.
I think that may be asking a lot-although NTRP is definitely going in the right direction on the institutional ownership front...
https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ntrp/institutional-holdings
However, if you're right, we probably would need to get to $14-$16 by the end of the quarter to achieve it...So I hope you are!
Thanks- Of course even an IV version that actually works is priceless, so why mess with a winning formula pre-approval. Although I'd bet they're certainly working on it, keep it simple makes perfect sense for now.
Any idea how far they've come in terms of an oral formulation? Do you know if anyone from NTRP has addressed the issue?
Though I think the comparisons to AXSM are a bit overdone(my largest position), just like this company(till very recently), you couldn't give it away...but one ironclad data set changed all that.
I really think this will be the same story. Of course a pretty strong data set already exists-but since it was buried within a larger study with (perceived) so-so results, we're still here at 80+ML...
I think that(plus the hx of AD failures)pretty much explains it.
Absolutely-You mean you're able to reverse the effects of AD? You've "GOT TO BE KIDDING!!!"...Nope!
Follow up Note to Anyone Inclined to Compare AVXL vs NTRP data to date
I just took closer look at the Janney AVXL report, and it reminded me that, in addition to the absence of a placebo group, this extremely small Ph2a data set was open label.
In this context, where Pts, experimenters, and evaluators all know who has been receiving what dosages, the potential for selective attention and differential expectations on the part of all participants is at least as compromising as the absence of a placebo control.
Therefore, when you put these 2 factors together, the AVXL data, as such, is, at best, suggestive of a drug effect, but little more than that.
As a result, there really is no ANAVEX 2-73 data in AD that currently warrants serious consideration, particularly in view of the fact that even these results didn't demonstrate actual improvement.
Therefore, comparing 2-73 data with very significant NTRP blinded, placebo controlled bryostatin data that clearly demonstrated functional improvements on AD measures is simply unwarranted.
For these reasons, I'm more confirmed than ever in the opinion that NTRP is way ahead of AVXL, both in terms of AD drug development as well as investment potential.
In fact, not drawing more attention to this major shortfall is my primary complaint regarding the Janney AVXL report
Hey Xena-I'm definitely open to the longer term prospects of the AVXL program. It's just that to date, I haven't seen any data that demonstrates statistically significant improvement.
But if there is any, please provide me with a link to it.
As I think I said before, I definitely don't view this as ultimately a winner take all proposition. I suspect, just like in oncology, that different targets will yield beneficial results in different sub-populations, and combo therapies incorporating the synergies of multiple targets are likely to yield the best results over time.
However, until I see anything from AVXL that eclipses the "slow the rate of decline" standard we've seen with all previous AD drugs, I think it's hard to conclude that NTRP doesn't have a very big advantage at the moment.
So as I said, please provide me with a link if I've missed something here.
And I'll certainly be looking forward to that third party paper you mentioned!