Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[imho]

Today's news was "good", not bad or great. And the market had priced in "good", though clearly many were expecting great, hence the selling.

Saturday's clarity might reveal the results to actually be "great". From the abstract's wording, this is a possibility. But it's not the likely one. I would think the abstract was worded precisely, and the wording taken at face value says "good".

Great would have been stating that "the majority of patients had seen significant improvement in all three secondary outcome tests." (And incredible would have been "vast" majority.)

This stuff about "the average improved" is good. Not great.

Like most, I am perplexed but the two versions of the abstract. Now, I have another interpretation and I would like you or others to comment.

First, assume there are no typos (i.e. 12 weeks was meant to be 12 weeks in the first abstract and 5 weeks was meant as 5 weeks)

So here is the first abstract concerning the MMSE:

In the secondary outcome endpoints preliminary analysis of data from subjects to date shows an average improvement of the MMSE score at week 12 in PART B (week 17 from baseline). A significant majority of all patients tested so far improved their respective MMSE score.

and here is the second or final one:

In the secondary outcome endpoints preliminary analysis of data from subjects shows an average improvement of the MMSE score at week 5. A majority of all patients tested so far improved their respective MMSE score.

Putting the two together, this is what I read: after 5 weeks the average MMSE showed improvement in the majority of patients. After 12 weeks, the average MMSE showed improvement in a significant majority of the patients.

In other words, the drug works better the longer it is taken. Comments?

IMHO