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.
There will be no useful competition.
...273's overall market share could diminish as competitors come on line,....
The market won’t make Anavex 2-73.
Market wants to know 273 works for alz....
Shape ain’t right for toxicity.
This [the molecule’s unique molecular structure] may explain why blarcamasine seems to have no side effects: It is suited to interact with a target that has a unique structure, and the inference would be that blarcamasine cannot interact with other proteins because they are too different in kind from the S1R.
Two perspectives: Before or after an FDA decision.
I hope this is sarcasm [My statement that “Until the FDA approves the drug, it is categorically and unconditionally unsafe and ineffective. Period. ”]
Of course...
Don’t dismiss the placebo or even nocebo effect.
No, it’s the stock message board effect.
-" very high rollover rate into the open-label study which was over 95% which is extremely high."----what is significance of this ??? Why do patients want to stay on the drug ???
It’s not just my defense.
Best defense of our drug I’ve ever heard.
The lack of evidence of unsafety or inefficacy.
..."are there any credible contradictions out in the scientific community to any AVXL claims?"
Again, the profound blarcamesine safety factor.
We get approval for RETT and then the Aussies approve us for ALZ. And PDD gets approved. Our Safety factor has been near perfect in all tests for all of the above.
The turning point to come.
You are asking a lot in a short period of time. The financial community is only beginning to accept the death of the amyloid thesis, and now you are looking for adoption of a pan-CNS approach which has never been contemplated, let alone suggested.
Like the trends.
Well, I purchased a few hundred AVXLs this morning, at $18.52. It’s my first purchase in several years; had a few discretionary dollars to put to work (well, bet on increasing value of AVXL). At the end of the trading day, very satisfied.
I then listened to the segments of the online conference call that weren’t silent. Everything I heard confirmed my expectations; all positive. When the transcript gets posted, I’ll scrutinize everything and re-evaluate. But with Rett results out in the second half of the year, Christmas may be rather joyous. Those data points will substantiate in humans the blarcamesine mechanism of action (MOA), activating the sigma-1 receptor protein, with all of the consequent good things in neurons. The murine (lab rodent) data are revolutionary, but discounted because mice aren’t men (or girls with Rett syndrome).
When the Rett and Alzheimer’s trials data are released, late this year and into next, postings on the Anavex Ihub board (this one) will be different. Gonna be hard to tell how bad Missling is, and how blarcamesine is a failure.
From the start of my interest (and equity investment) in Anavex Life Sciences Corp a number of years ago I’ve always looked to 2023 to be the year of the company’s operating success. It will then be selling blarcamesine across much of the globe, for a diversity of indications. Right now, my composite AVXL cost basis price is $2.33. In a few years, should I be liquidating any of my position (have no intention of doing so), I’d have some substantial capital gains taxes. Instead, I intend to hold my position, reap eventual dividends, but pass the position on to my estate beneficiaries, my wife and children.
Everything trending as anticipated; slowly but deliberately.
Blarcamesine can replace Aricept, immediately.
You had once written that Aricept may take up space on the Sigma1 molecule. I'm wonder if you still think that, as well how long do you think patients would have to stop taking it in order for blarcasamine to be more effective?
No competition; nothing else can work.
Anavex is the ONLY drug to show actual IMPROVEMENT for longer than a year from baseline for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease.
The Ponce de León Effect.
...last year I posited that we really may be looking at a Sigma1 receptor disease -- I would now say a syndrome -- subject to multiple manifestations currently categorized as independent CNS diseases. That hypothesis is only getting stronger as trial results come in.
But, what’s at stake?
We have to trust that Dr.M knows what he is doing.
Well, blarcamesine is bad, regardless.
"Missling-“we are on the way for an FDA approval for Rett "--any way this can indeed be verified ??????
Extremely powerful, at minute dosages.
Please, compare and comment regarding the IC50 concentrations.
They know, as do we.
I think Big Pharma is quite aware of what Anavex can do and are strategically doing what they can to delay and deny it's existence.
Our postings; and Dr. Hagerman’s.
...Mayo, Xena, Boi, Power, Lima, Bourbon, Sparks, Raja, george, Steady, HMB, Jonjones, Dadof, xo, Ruby, Talon, arrow, infit, rocalinda, Jager, oldandintheway, bb857, Red, and not to forget our old friend Bennyboy, etc.
No MOA competition.
...what if competition with similiar MOA gets approval before?
Stuck in the past.
Read a new article in Science today, the weekly journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): Treatments for Alzheimer’s disease emerge.
And, of course, the words “Anavex,” “blarcamesine,” or “sigma-1 receptor” did not appear. Focus was solely on beta-amyloids and tau tangles.
Some verbiage on immunological approaches (Biogen’s Aduhelm, etc.).
Of course, the author is an “expert,” at Ann Romney Center for Neurologic Diseases, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Cherries and watermelons.
Is there any concern that ANVS's failure could be a harbinger for AVXL or do the MOAs differ so much that it's apples to oranges?
Nothing changes until sales approval happens.
Perhaps if the trial is large enough they too can add in Covid vaccinated patients and unvaccinated patients and track the progression or lack there of for infection.
Results of the Alzheimer’s prophylaxis trial.
Yes such a trial [to demonstrate blarcamesine prophylaxis of Alzheimer’s] will definitely have to be large and long enough that statistics have it that a certain percentage of the enrolled at risk people would have developed AD absent the prevention.
No effects whatsoever.
What effect SAVA's results will have on AVXL is a big unknown.
Important correction.
I just got a private message from a frequent, very helpful board member. I appreciate his message to me. VERY important (and accurate).
He notes that I made this claim: "As noted previously, blarcamesine, against Alzheimer’s, is effective in about 80% of those with the disease."
But here’s the correction:
According to TGD [the good doctor, CEO Christopher Missling], A2-73 is effective in pretty much everyone - not just 80% of those with AD.
As I recall, he compared the effectiveness of those with the wild type protein (i.e. the 80%) as taking an elevator to the top floor of a building. And those without the wild type (i.e. the remaining 20% of the population) as having to take the stairs...it's still effective for them, it would just take a little longer for them to get to the top floor. (I'm paraphrasing, of course)
Product advancement.
...how do you treat 3-71, if it is just a more potent form of 2-73. You don't want to make your primary drug redundant. How does Anavex make them travel on separate tracks?
Contract likely to be signed.
nick responded to a tweet saying they have the term sheet for the durango location, whatever that means, he sounded excited about it
The potential of Anavex 3-71
First, for myself and many others, I want to commend georgejjl for his always-informative and detailed posts; information buried in the dozens of papers and studies on Anavex molecules. George, you so helpfully pull out and post the most information needed to understand the deep science of Anavex. Your postings continue to highlight and validate the science that will make Anavex Life Sciences Corp a major pharmaceutical in a few years. Our thanks.
For example, your new post included this:
...AF710B [Anavex 3-71] is an allosteric M1 receptor agonist. Its heteromer-specific effects differentiate it from other M1 agonists and modulators. Fisher claimed that the new compound is exquisitely potent, acting as a cognitive enhancer in rats at 1 to 30 micrograms (not milligrams) per kilogram body weight. According to Fisher, the compound is orally available with a safety margin of more than 50,000 times the minimally active dose. “Those are orders of magnitude more potent than donepezil and other agonists acting either on the M1 or the s-1 receptors, respectively,” Fisher said.
But a love of what sort?
AVXL needs some love from the big boys on Wall Street(think SAVA, ANVS).
Pretty deep, but phenomenally significant.
...could you please take the time to read (perhaps you have seen before) and give us the conclusion you reach what the article is saying.
Good question.
...could they [blarcamesine and simufilam] be synergistic?
Very different.
Are SAVA and AVXL on similar but different paths?
Are the institutional owners of AVXLs ignorant?
Anavex have no longer patent protection to replace the original Vamvakides patent on A2-73 in it current form for standalone treatment.
So what. How do they compare?
And there are S1 agonists under clinical trials for CNS diseases, as well as some already commercially available.
Obfuscation, clearly.
We don't "own it..."
No, 2022, next year.
The thing is the company has to be around in 2023.
SAVA and ANVS. Why?
This, of course, is the iHub AVXL message board. The best online compendium of Anavex information, just in front of Anavex’s recent update presentation: http://www.anavex.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Anavex-Presentation-July-2021.pdf
To be pondered are the frequent postings laying out (to a minor degree) information on ANVS, SAVA, and a few other equities. Why are those so frequently mentioned on this board? Please tell: are the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) or the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) constrained to approve only a single drug for the CNS (central nervous system) diseases in the Anavex pipeline; Rett syndrome, Parkinson’s disease dementia, or Alzheimer’s disease? How, in any way, does the consideration for drug use of the products of other pharmaceuticals affect or disqualify in any way a future application of blarcamesine by Anavex Life Sciences Corp?
Fact is, the FDA will approve blarcamesine based solely on its clinical results which, based upon all of the pre- and early clinical data, and efficacious MOA, mechanism of action, will be exceptionally good. When they get Anavex’s New Drug Application (FDA), there will be no information presented or considered on any other new drug owned by SAVA, ANVS, or any other company. To get a new drug approved it must either equal or exceed the efficacies of any existing drugs. For Alzheimer’s, there are but a few; all of which provide only the slightest therapeutic efficacy. Blarcamesine has no competition; its therapeutic outcomes for all three targeted CNS diseases will greatly exceed both the existing and in-trial drugs of any other company.
So, why the awkwardly imposing discussions of matters SAVA, etc. on this board? They are utterly irrelevant. They belong on their own message boards. Usefully, I simply skip or delete any such postings I’m burdened with on this otherwise information-dense message board. The Delete key on my keyboard functions wonderfully.
Of course, some are interested in the pharmaceuticals mentioned on this board solely for short-term trading purposes. Who’s going to make a buck this week on any of the several pharmas that appear here? For those readers, my best wishes. Utterly irrelevant to my goals; to make a very profitable long-term investment (not a trading vehicle). I’ll measure my success at the end of 2023—then continue to retain my AVXL position. I don’t anticipate taking any of my profits (share sales) for many years, if ever. I’m looking for two things from my AVXL position: eventually, rewarding dividends, and, then, dispersal of my position to my estate benefactors upon my demise. That’s all “long term.” I disregard the short-term, day-trading stuff; of no use for me. I’m an investor, not a trader.
Best wishes for all.
Where was this (the Anavex PDF) presented?
Online, for any and all to read.
Number of potential blarcamesine users.
For some future Anavex revenues calculations some numbers have to be used. One of the first ones is the total number of potential individuals who will be taking blarcamesine.
In today’s Anavex presentation it was claimed that in the Americas, in 2015, 9.4 million people were living with dementia; in Europe 10.5 million. To be conservative, I’ll presume there will be 6 million Americans and 6 million Europeans taking blarcamesine in, say, 2024; 12 million in the developed world.
Do your own revenue estimations. You will need to also presume some daily cost of blarcamesine. I’ll presume a day’s dose will cost the patient (well, his insurance company or government) $10. For each patient that would be a yearly cost of $3650. For Anavex that would be gross annual revenues of $3650 x 12 million: $43,800,000,000 ($43.8 billion).
I’ll presume that when that happens there will be one hundred million outstanding AVXL shares. The $43.8 billion of annual gross revenues divided up among those shares would be $438 per share.
Take it from there; estimate the value of a share of AVXL a few years out.
But personally I anticipate that blarcamesine (or Anavex 3-71) will eventually be rather universally prescribed in late middle age (45?) as a general geriatric disease prophylactic, taken by hundreds of millions (at say, $5/day). Count the multitude of zeros in those calculations.