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.
Bio: Thank you. Brilliant!
Yes, you are correct about that. Plus, Biogen has the resources to wage a war of attrition.
Biogen WSJ article. Drugmakers Call Experimental Alzheimer’s Drug Study Positive. The article is positive about the Biogen announcement of last week, but it does point this out near the end:
”The study involved 856 subjects in the early stage of the disease. Among the side effects that the companies re-ported were reactions at the sites of the infusion and swelling around blood vessels observed with brain imaging.”
Write to the authors of the above article: Write to Daniela Hernandez at daniela.h-ernandez@wsj.com and Peter Loftus at peter.lof-tus@wsj.com
Early Tests Raise Alzheimer’s Hopes Despite Recent Failures
https://www.wsj.com/articles/drugmakers-call-experimental-alzheimers-drug-study-outcome-positive-1530897640?emailToken=860088f10210a612c8cf088c9adf08c4dflEuRP6EeNkIP0TSTvXbpdkoPv1QTgD4fjaJRoeglh0Kt+4dTIjc1/7DVdOABCGTOY/kaAk5xF6M7kJJ3bheJibiammHJjTLJ8MDXfVDWBNSU73rFqvxFRIBpEbmyq7&reflink=article_email_share
Thank you Dranesthesia, I think and hope you will do better.
I have a gripe with the medical profession in general not all members specifically. I am almost 77 in age. I work more than 5 days a week, exercise every day, have many and varied interests, personally manage most of my investments, enjoy cooking and drinking wine, travel frequently, etc., etc. The exercise I do is considered moderate to extreme by people a lot younger than I am. One of my doctors had the nerve to tell me that I exercised too much, that a person my age should not exercise every day and no more than 30 minutes at at time. I ignore this advice.
I mention the above because I am about to whine about the gripe I have with the medical profession. It seems to me that conventional medical "wisdom" is that aging is programed. When I have medical appointments they all seem to assume that I cannot do the things I do because of my age. Moreover, they seem to believe that my time is of no importance because of my age. They apparently assume that I spend most of my day sitting at home my rocking chair. This is an aggravation to me because I am too busy every day for my time to be wasted making frequent trips for medical appointments and sitting in waiting rooms of medical offices that practice what I refer to as "cattle call" medicine. It seems that a number of medical offices these days are more attuned to "medical economics" than in curing patients. "Medical economics" does not value the time or point of view of the patient. It is focused on "treating" as many patients as possible each day and incorporates scheduling more than one patient for the same doctor at the same time.
Therefore, I for one prefer medication orally administered by myself without having to make a trip to a clinic or medical office. I am interested in AVXL 2-73 too because I believe it has potential for prevention of age related diseases such as dementia, mitchrondorial dysfunciton, Parkinson's, Alzhiemer's, and numerous other diseases associated with aging. Aging is not and need not be programmed, and there are things that a person may do to function well as a person ages. However, I realize that the focus in the medical profession is with "treating" patients once they are afflicted and not to prevent diseases that everyone certainly knows is quite often associated with aging.
F1ash:
You are correct and your analysis is more readable than what I have tried to express as in my post of a few minutes ago. I agree with you completely. The knee jerk reaction to Friday’s announcement should be ignored. Thank you for your posts.
Yes, what you say makes perfect sense, and you are on the right track. The Cantor deal certainly provides Anavex the flexibility to raise capital “to fully implement our (Anavex’s) business, operating and development plans....”
In support of what we are surmising, I am cutting and pasting pertinent parts about why the Cantor agreement was done:
"Our ability to sell shares to Lincoln Park and obtain funds under the Purchase Agreement is limited by the terms and conditions in the Purchase Agreement, including restrictions on when we may sell shares to Lincoln Park, restrictions on the amounts we may sell to Lincoln Park at any one time, and a limitation on our ability to sell shares to Lincoln Park to the extent that it would cause Lincoln Park to beneficially own more than 9.99% of our outstanding Common Stock. Therefore, we might not have access to the full amount available to us under the Purchase Agreement.....
The extent we rely on Lincoln Park as a source of funding will depend on a number of factors including, the prevailing market price of our Common Stock and the extent to which we are able to secure working capital from other sources. If obtaining sufficient funding from Lincoln Park were to prove unavailable or prohibitively dilutive, we will need to secure another source of funding in order to satisfy our working capital needs....."
"Another source of funding" refers to funding through Cantor. Therefore, there is language in the prospectus supplement disclosed Friday about the Cantor transaction that supports such a thesis.
In any event, whether the 9,000,000 shares on Tuesday was related to Cantor or not, Anavex is in a much better position to raise capital in my opinion; however, others should study both the 2016 Lincoln arrangement and the Cantor accord, which supplements the Lincoln funding transaction. Everyone may then form their own opinions and conclusions, but my view of this is that Anavex is in a favorable position to fund its operations, to conduct its planned clinical trials and to advance the commercialization of any drug that may be approved within the next 3 years. I do not mean to say that a partnership(s) will not be needed, but I do believe Anavex is in a stronger position to either go it along or to negotiate a very favorable partnership (s) should that be necessary.
Yes. Cantor the agreement says “ ... we may offer and sell shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $50,000,000 from time to time through Cantor Fitzgerald, acting as our sales agent.
This is a prospectus supplement to the prospectus issued in September 2016. Study the September 2016 prospectus as well as this supplement. This supplement also covers the Lincoln Park deal.
Today’s supplement prospectus says:
"Our ability to sell shares to Lincoln Park and obtain funds under the Purchase Agreement is limited by the terms and conditions in the Purchase Agreement, including restrictions on when we may sell shares to Lincoln Park, restrictions on the amounts we may sell to Lincoln Park at any one time, and a limitation on our ability to sell shares to Lincoln Park to the extent that it would cause Lincoln Park to beneficially own more than 9.99% of our outstanding Common Stock. Therefore, we might not have access to the full amount available to us under the Purchase Agreement. In addition, any amounts we sell under the PurchaseAgreement may not satisfy all of our funding needs, even if we are able and choose to sell all $50,000,000 of our Common Stock under the Purchase Agreement.
We elected to enter into the Purchase Agreement with Lincoln Park as we expect that amount of capital over the next three years will be required for us to fully implement our business, operating and development plans. The extent we rely on Lincoln Park as a source of funding will depend on a number of factors including, the prevailing market price of our Common Stock and the extent to which we are able to secure working capital from other sources. If obtaining sufficient funding from Lincoln Park were to prove unavailable or prohibitively dilutive, we will need to secure another source of funding in order to satisfy our working capital needs. Even if we sell all $50,000,000 of shares of our Common Stock under the Purchase Agreement, we may still need additional capital to fully implement our business, operating and development plans. Should the financing we require to sustain our working capital needs be unavailable or prohibitively expensive when we require it, the consequences could be a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial condition and prospects."
I could be wrong, but I see this as giving Anavex flexibility to raise capital for what Anavex estimates will be needed for operating capital, to conduct clinical trials, to ramp up and come to market over the next three years. Correct me if I am wrong, but I do not see where it is necessarily any more or much more dilutive than what has been previously announced. I do see it as curing problems that Anavex saw that existed with relying on Lincoln Park along. However, please pour over all that has been disclosed by Anavex, do your own DD, and draw your own conclusions. If you see that what has been announced today as negative, sell your shares if you own shares or do not purchase any shares if you do not own shares. However, I will hold my position,and I may purchase additional shares as I have done now over the course of the last 4 years.
Investor, I think (although I need to study this more as well) that what you say may be correct when you say "my thought is that Anavex is replacing LPC with Cantor for the second traunch of $50M and thus this prospectus is for $100M total incorporating the LPC agreement and the sales of stock so far under that agreement. "
This is some of the wording from today's prospectus:
"Our ability to sell shares to Lincoln Park and obtain funds under the Purchase Agreement is limited by the terms and conditions in the Purchase Agreement, including restrictions on when we may sell shares to Lincoln Park, restrictions on the amounts we may sell to Lincoln Park at any one time, and a limitation on our ability to sell shares to Lincoln Park to the extent that it would cause Lincoln Park to beneficially own more than 9.99% of our outstanding Common Stock. Therefore, we might not have access to the full amount available to us under the Purchase Agreement. In addition, any amounts we sell under the PurchaseAgreement may not satisfy all of our funding needs, even if we are able and choose to sell all $50,000,000 of our Common Stock under the Purchase Agreement.
We elected to enter into the Purchase Agreement with Lincoln Park as we expect that amount of capital over the next three years will be required for us to fully implement our business, operating and development plans. The extent we rely on Lincoln Park as a source of funding will depend on a number of factors including, the prevailing market price of our Common Stock and the extent to which we are able to secure working capital from other sources. If obtaining sufficient funding from Lincoln Park were to prove unavailable or prohibitively dilutive, we will need to secure another source of funding in order to satisfy our working capital needs. Even if we sell all $50,000,000 of shares of our Common Stock under the Purchase Agreement, we may still need additional capital to fully implement our business, operating and development plans. Should the financing we require to sustain our working capital needs be unavailable or prohibitively expensive when we require it, the consequences could be a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial condition and prospects."
The paragraph immediately above refers to "development plans". I am curious about what that means. Could it mean that the company is anticipating funds needed to bring the drug to market.
So far, I find today's Biogen announcement sketchy, and I am curious about any adverse effects of the patients receiving the highest dosage that I understand was administered intravenously over 18 months. Reportedly, it was these patients receiving the highest dosage that benefited. Additionally, what complications occurred with the intravenous injections besides the fact that a drug administered intravenously is not as advantageous, convenient, and cost effective as taking your pills in your natural living environment at home, work or play.
Analysts are urging caution. So, Bio, I think you are correct!
"'Jefferies analyst Michael Yee remains cautious of Biogen and wrote investors have been "pretty bearish on Alzheimer's" treatments because the disease is so difficult to treat. Yee maintained his "hold" recommendation on the stock, arguing that the latest data was not significant enough to change his rating. The stock currently has 14 "buy" and six "hold" ratings on it from analysts."
Biogen Shares Soar on Positive Alzheimer's Drug Results
https://www.thestreet.com/investing/stocks/alzheimer-drug-results-boost-biogen-shares-14643336?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO&yptr=yahoo
It looks like we may have at the very least a 50% correction of the large move up that occurred earlier this week. Volatility is to be expected. July should be an interesting month. What’s more, the remainder of this year will be interesting with the anticipation of more trials to be announced, and the first 6 months of 2019 will be a period of epiphany.
The technicals are strong. As I have believed all along the fundamentals are strong. I use Tom Demarks service, which I find to be highly reliable in general. My Demark study is favorable for this move to continue short term for the next week or so, meaning we should have at least 8 trading days, if not more, of generally moving upwards. What is more, if you are a follower of Elliott Wave analysis (I will leave that to Tom123), we may concievably be about to end (if we have not already done so) a wave 2 down. 3rd waves are allegedly what you want to catch. If and when AVXL share price enters wave 3, it should take us to a price higher than the last short term high of $4.35. I think $4.35 is at or near the top of what may be considered wave 1. Wave 2, a corretion wave, concievably ended around $2.51. Tom 123, assuming we may have commenced a wave 3 move up, where do you think wave 3 may take us? It seems that it may very well take the share price past the "...Fibonacci geometric target 4.86..." Tom 123 mentions in one of his last posts.
Of course, Elliott Wave analysis, as Tom Demark analysis, is not perfect and both sometimes seem to be problematic when applied to small biotech stocks or when any stock starts trending, hopefully in this case upwards. However, we have been as high as $5.14-$5.15 in the fall of last year (we were over $6 - about $6.84 on February 21, 2017), and about $8.30 in July 2016 as well as $14.84 in November 2015. Why can't we do better than $4.86 at this juncture with the Alzheimer's trial proceeding and Parkinson's and Rett clinical trials on the horizon?
A question we all should ask ourselves is this: Is Anavex in a more favorable position than in 2015 - 2017 or worse?
Note: I could not reply directly to Tom123’s last post because I have not upgraded as IHub keeps urging me to do. Perhaps Tom will read this post and reply.
Bio:
Thank you. Your posts are insightful, and it is apparent from reading them that you are highly intelligent and knowledgeable. I value reading what you publish.
On your point about inflexibility, it reminds me about the resistance that has existed throughout history to new scientific theories. Reasons for explaining this resistance are many such as distaste for change, religious views, politics, etc. Additionally, there is this standard of ”peer review” that I see as an obstacle to new scientific theories, especially for treating Alzheimer’s. Who would you consider to be in the ”peer” group that reviews and approves a new scientific theory that Anavex is pursuing? What are these ”peers” thinking about this new theory to treat Alzheimer’s and other CNS diseases? What are the reasons these ”peers” may be dismissive or resistant to AVXL 2-73 or any other drug based on a completely new theory that clashes with the conventional big pharma view?
Here we have tiny Anavex pursuing innovative treatments for diseases -- some in the blockbuster category like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson's. Tiny companies are not supposed to do this! How dare Anavex step on the toes of giant pharmaceutical companies!
“Uncertainty is the only certainty there is, and knowing how to live with insecurity is the only security.”
? John Allen Paulos
Any new, innovative idea is fraught with uncertainty, takes time and has to go through the stage of looking wrong because it involves doing something that no one else has done. Our drug, AVXL 2-73, is based on new science for treating Alzheimer’s and other CNS diseases. Additionally, the pending clinical trials and FDA guidelines are new.
As traders and investors we must do our utmost to suppress our emotions. When you approach a market with emotion, you are doing yourself an immense disservice. Many posters here are frustrated with the price action. I understand where it is coming from; however, I urge you to try to suppress your frustration until we know something for sure. We should not let emotions and frustrations get the best of us if we have done the due diligence that convinced us to invest in this new science. If we feel we are right, we should put our emotions aside and sit tight.
So far, I do not see that anything has changed except for the share price.
As someone said: ”Anavex was launched with a drug that targets the Sigma-1 receptor to activate cellular autophagy or digestion of misfolded proteins. The Sigma-1 receptor is an important therapeutic target. The Anavex drugs have, pre-clinically, proven effective in various central nervous system disorders, including Alzheimer’s, Rett syndrome, Parkinson’s disease, and depression. This technology has applications for anti-aging therapies as well as age-related and genetic diseases.” Has any of this changed? I do not think so. This is why I purchased my Anavex shares, and why I will not allow my frustration, impatience and emotions convince me to dump my shares.
The purchase agreement announced in today’s news is conceivably good news wherein Lightwave entered into an agreement to acquire polymer assets of BrPhotonics Productos Optoelectrónicos S.A., including 15 patents for $350,000 once consummated. What do you all think? $350,000 for 15 patents!
Now hold that thought, $350,000 for 15 patents plus other assets. That is $23,333.33 per patent alone, but Lightwave purchased other assets, and what did it take BrPhotonics to accumulate those assets? How worthwhile are these patents? It would take a very long time to analyze 15 existing patents. What did it take to develop/acquire those 15 patents and how valuable are those patents? How much would that work out to be per hour per patent, and how successful will these patents be? Either this is one of the deals of this century, or it is a waste of a relatively a small amount of money.
Lastly, keep in mind that patents are legal monopolies. Patents provide protection from potential competitors, and allow the holder of the patents to justifiably charge high prices where the patents are enforceable. It is possible to obtain global patent protection. Therefore, one other question is what areas of the world do these patents provide protection? That may be another time consuming and difficult question to answer. Nevertheless, 15 patents do provide arrows in the quiver for more patent protection, which may make this company’s product more profitable/valuable.
Thanks
Anavex is a component of the Russell 2000. Foreman refers to the Russell 3000 ”Reconstruction” not a delisting from the Russel 2000. See also brichnyc Post# 152960
That makes sense. Thank you.
What does a Russel delisting mean? Note: Note: Axon is also on the Russel delisting list Fireman brings to our attention.
”When your stock gets delisted, or booted from the stock exchange that it's traded on, there's no question that things could be better. Regardless of the reason for the company's delisting, the fact that it got kicked off their exchange is something that you should be very concerned with as a shareholder.
Is Delisting Ever Good?
Believe it or not, in and of itself, getting delisted from a stock exchange isn't a bad thing -- that is, when the company delists by choice.
There are a couple of reasons why a company would choose to delist itself from the exchange it trades on. While going public is considered by many to be the pinnacle of success for a company (see IPO), in many cases going private is actually a good thing (see private equity).
How? Going private consolidates ownership in a company and can actually put the company in a better financial situation than it once was in. Since going private generally suggests that another party has bought out a company's outstanding shares, most people never encounter this type of delisting situation.
Corporate restructuring can be another positive reason for delisting: Companies often change names as the result of a merger or acquisition, and sometimes companies choose to move to another major exchange. In either of these cases, delisting wouldn't be a reason for alarm.
The Ugly Side of Delisting
More often than not, when a company gets delisted, it's a result of bad things, not good ones. Companies can be (and frequently are) delisted for failing to maintain the requirements set forth by their exchange. Some of these requirements are based on a company's ability to meet filing deadlines, while others relate to the company's performance in the stock market.”
https://www.thestreet.com/story/10358340/1/what-happens-when-my-stock-is-delisted.html
Is it realistic to think that a clinical trial AVXL 2-73 for Rett a rare disease for which no treatment exists, for which Orphan status is granted by the FDA, which the Rett Foundation (THE ”rare disease patient group” for Rett) supports the trial with it's funds at risk, for a drug that so far has been proven safe in other clinical trials, and for a clinical trial that is set up and ready to go at treatment centers that desire to do this trial using AVXL 2-73 to treat this awful disease will not occur?
”The FDA Office of Orphan Products Development (OOPD) mission is to advance the evaluation and development of products (drugs, biologics, devices, or medical foods) that demonstrate promise for the diagnosis and/or treatment of rare diseases or conditions. In fulfilling that task, OOPD evaluates scientific and clinical data submissions from sponsors to identify and designate products as promising for rare diseases and to further advance scientific development of such promising medical products. The office also works on rare disease issues with the medical and research communities, professional organizations, academia, governmental agencies, industry, and rare disease patient groups.” https://www.fda.gov/forindustry/developingproductsforrarediseasesconditions/default.htm
The FDA has already determined all as set forth in the above paragraph in granting the Orphan Status for AVXL 2-73.
So again, is it reasonable to speculate that the AVXL 2-73 trial will not take place? Is it reasonable to speculate that the Rett trial will be delayed into 2019 or 2020 or commence sooner? I do not think so.
H.C. Wainwright Analysts Earn Number One Rankings in 2017 Thomson Reuters Analyst Awards
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170724005355/en/H.C.-Wainwright-Analysts-Earn-Number-Rankings-2017
No matter how you put it, the price charts for AVXL, daily or otherwise, are up. In other words, the “technicals” are up. That said, nobody can catch all the fluctuations. As I pointed out yesterday (I again publish this below at the end), the trend is up for now. We are having a bullish move after a long dry spell. Hold your long position at the very least until you think this near term move is over, but you best keep some shares for the big move that may occur down the road based on what we know about the science, the current regulatory environment, and the potential for AVXL 2-73 to treat multiple devastating diseases for which there is no effective treatment. In other words, if you have a long position when the best positive news appears -- drug approval as one example-- you will catch the big move. It is too late to react to get in on the big move after the big news is announced. Catching the big move is the only way to make real money. It is also true that there may not be enough time to get out of a short position if a ruinous gigantic move upwards occurs.
This is a different environment that we are in compared to the past. Things have changed, and change is taking place at a faster pace -- not as rapid as some may like but definitely faster. You must study general conditions affecting your individual stocks. Ask yourself, have we seen the beginning of a reversal of general conditions affecting AVXL? It may still be early, but what are we witnessing? Many here have said, "something is going on", but what is it? Frankly, we do not know for sure. This is what makes markets so interesting and challenging. However, I think I may say that whatever it is, it is the surely the opposite of negative, which is a different way of saying it is positive.
Lastly, this is a post I published last night that may be helpful in understanding what I said above:
"If the old saying "volume leads price" has merit, the share price is definitely up for the most part. Look at the volume for the last few days. Volume has significantly increased. Share price may take a breather soon, but I would not be discouraged. I think it is likely the trend will now be our friend. The trend was down for approximately 7 months from October 2017 (when SP was above $5.00) through May 2018, but it has clearly turned upward. In the last 4 days share price has moved above the 200 MA line and held at and above that line. Price could briefly pull back below the 200 day MA. However, AVXL has recently gained some positive analyst ratings, the passage of the right to try law sends a positive message, important CNS conferences will be taking place soon, and announcements about clinical trials will occur. Therefore, the odds are favorable for seeing AVXL in the $5.00 range again in the near term."
If the old saying "volume leads price" has merit, the share price is definitely up for the most part. Look at the volume for the last few days. Volume has significantly increased. Share price may take a breather soon, but I would not be discouraged. I think it is likely the trend will now be our friend. The trend was down for approximately 7 months from October 2017 (when SP was above $5.00) through May 2018, but it has clearly turned upward. In the last 4 days share price has moved above the 200 MA line and held at and above that line. Price could briefly pull back below the 200 day MA. However, AVXL has recently gained some positive analyst ratings, the passage of the right to try law sends a positive message, important CNS conferences will be taking place soon, and announcements about clinical trials will occur. Therefore, the odds are favorable for seeing AVXL in the $5.00 range again in the near term.
Bourbon:
On another subject but in reply to another message you sent, I believe Anavex’s share price could move into the $5.00 range by the end of the month.
Yes, I concur with Kevin, Bio, and Dado. By the way, I will venture to pass along some advice to those that choose to short AVXL. It is the same advice I was fortunate to receive years ago when I desired to buy a ranch out-west. This advice came from an oldtimer: ”If you want to turn a large fortune into a small fortune, buy a ranch.” It was not a large ranch by out-west standards. Plus, I did not have a fortune, but I am glad that I heeded the advice although I was young and prone to be overly confident at the time.
The only news I see is that Richard Uihlein was elected Chairman of the Board of directors. You may recall that this is the gentleman that sometime ago agreed to extend BTX a $10,000.00 line of credit. I suppose that may be viewed as a vote of confidence in the companies ability to fund clinical trails, etc.
Tom: In reply to ”I'm hopeful for AVXL to have weathered the selling storm...”, I have been thinking the same. From my analysis, I think there is a strong possibility that next week the share price will advance for most of the week into the $3.00 - $3.40 range. Probably, the end of next week or the following week, we may see a pull back. For now, at least, the trend is up from a recent low of $1.85, approximately a 3 year low. I think it is likely the trend will remain up for the near and intermediate future despite pullbacks. It may remain up long term if clinical trials are successful.
Importantly, we are approaching the last half of 2018 during which 3 clinical trials should proceed and some important conferences will be held. Plus, AVXL has recently gained some positive analyst ratings.
Of course, I mostly look at and speak about the big picture for Anavex as opposed to a narrow focus on what the AVXL share price may do from day to day.
I think the passage of the right to try legislation at the very least sets the new mood of the nation and world that we want to have every opportunity available for treatment of any dreaded disease. As I told one of my doctors, ”I am more interested in a cure than I am in a diagnosis.” The time has come when more people everywhere will demand more chances for cures. This mood or attitude together with changes already in progress with expedited FDA drug approvals bode well for Anavex.
Right to Try Act. Does it allow an Alzheimer’s patient to try AVXL 2-73 at the patients cost (if the patient is not in a clinical trial)?
The Right to Try Act was signed into law by the President today.
One version of the right to try law (I do not know if this is what was passed and signed by the President) said this:
”(5) Terminal illness.--The term ``terminal illness'' has
the meaning given to such term in the State law specified in
subsection (a)(1)(B).”
(a) (1) (B) says this: ”...is authorized by, and in accordance with, State
law...”
It seems that the right to try AVXL 2-73 may be left up to each state. Anavex has to agree to sell it's drug as well.
Putting aside the law for now, it seems the the movement is toward labeling dementia as a terminal illness. See this older article as an example:
Redefining Dementia as a Terminal Illness
http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1930278,00.htmlRe
H.C. Wainwright now covers Anavex with a buy rating and $10 target.
https://www.streetinsider.com/dr/news.php?id=14248866&gfv=1
The website issue is much ado about nothing. If that is all to complain about, we have about run out of things to complain about.
It’s a good time to sell and to buy puts.
This evening I have been doing some additional research on the muscarinic m1 receptor for a reason not connected to Anavex or it's drugs. I happened to run across the below in Wikipedia. Although I do not rely on Wikipedia or any one particular source for research, I think the following is interesting and a summary of what many posters here already know. However, this may benefit skeptics and some that are new to Anavex and AVXL 2-73: See this for a Wikipedia discussion of AVXL 2-73.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANAVEX2-73
At least we have a Commissioner of the FDA that appears to embrace innovation, competition, access to more choices, competition, to provide us life saving medical products and to ensure that the United States is a leader in biomedical innovation. The problem is, as you help to point out, can changes be made a the system that has been dominated by giant pharmacuetical companies that prefer to protect their pipline of providing “maintenance” drugs. Drugs that keep the patient on a regimen of relieving symptoms rather than treating or curing their disease or problem.
Big pharmacuetical companies actually have people and policies to accomplish what they internally refer to as “evergreening” (do an internet search) wherin they protect their products to legally or illegally extend their monoplies to prevent competition and keep products in their pipeline at high prices to the exclusion of other products. Their motive is to exclude competition to maintain higher prices for products - not to cure or treat patients with the best drug that may otherwise be available.
The ‘’evergreeners’’ employ all sorts of tatics to prevent competition. For one case in point, involving an Alzhiermer’s drug, that does not effectively treat the disease see the Namenda antitrust litigation that is now pending.
So, back to Scott Gottlieb and his intentions that may help to cure the problem we have faced with big pharma gaming the system for profits rather than focusing on curing our diseases, here is what he said in July 2017:
''(C)onsumers derive greater value when they have access to more choice and competition....
Today, too many patients continue to be priced out of the medicines they need…That is why the Administration has begun the process of soliciting ideas and solutions to develop a more comprehensive strategy to address the complexities that have resulted in high prices, while continuing to foster innovation and competition. The goal of the Administration’s strategy is to address the problem of high drug prices, provide greater access to lifesaving medical products, and ensure that the United States remains a leader in biomedical innovation.''
Scott Gottlieb, M.D., Commissioner of FDA, July 27, 2017.
However, bringing about change to a system that is so powerful and supported by influential special interest is easier said than done. I am encouraged that change will come, but it will be difficult and slower than we desire.
Yes, and that is an intersting chart. Life expectancy in the U.S. is lower than I expected compared to the ohter countries shown on the chart. Thank you.
You make a good point. However, we should at least think of aging as bringing about diseases, some of which (CNS disorders for example) are not easily explainable but may be more effectively treated. I think you agree with that. I may be incorrect, and it may not be a disease. However, especially at my age and for the benefit of younger taxpayers, the idea of treating people as they age, to allow them to be functional is humane, is significant for our society, for containing healthcare costs, and for relieving those family members that sacrifice as care givers. Maybe it will become a speciality, diseases of the aging, with some appropriate label. Perhaps Anavex’s drugs will be useful in treating diseases of the aging.
There is a movement to treat aging as a disease. Age X, Biotime’s subsidiarly, is an example of one of several other companies formed to treat aging. It occurs to me that Anavex’s drugs, AVXL 2-73, and others may be considered antiaging drugs or drugs that treat diseases related to aging, whether it be hypertension, damage to mitochrondia, misfolding of protiens, unexplainable CNS problems that older people are inclined to endure, etc.
I am 76 years old. Fortunately, I remain very active, which is not the case for many of my friends. Remarkably, many of my old friends suffer from CNS disorders such as Parkinson’s, dementia of some sort, and some with unexplainable CNS disorders - doctors simply guessing about the diagnosis using explanations such as possibly spinal strokes, etc. Some of my friends also have cancer or have had cancer, but it seems that in all cases most of the cancers I know of have been treatable whereas the CNS disorders remain untreatable for the most part.
More focus is needed in the area of treating CNS disorders that occur with aging. If aging is recognized as a disease, it will be a way to contain the high cost of medical treatment and care. It will enable people to be functional as they age. Maybe more old people will die being independent and active rather than wasting away in a care facility. If aging is recognized as a disease (and it should be), the medical community should be taking a close look at the drugs Anavex is developing to treat that disease.
Galectin Therapeutics (NASDAQ:GALT) had its price target raised by analysts at HC Wainwright to $12.00. They now have a "buy" rating on the stock.
https://www.streetinsider.com/dr/news.php?id=14192136&gfv=1
Yes, that is correct.
Plus, Networking, Wine and Cheese Reception
immediately following the final session on day one. I like it.
It looks like a small conference that is ideal for networking with significant players and topics, including accelerated pathways and global access.
It certainly is wise to consider accessing the drug market anywhere in the world, and I believe many nations are accelerating access for drugs that treat dreaded diseases that are a burden on their healthcare systems. Remember, there are countries throughout the world that provide government supported healthcare for their citizens.