Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[amstocks82]

"3-71 is attacking M1 receptor but that is on the cell membrane and it is connected to PKC inside the cell.

NTRP is trying to attack ALZ by treating PKC - will it not be more effective as PKC is directly controlling downstream activity and not M1?"

Comparing the two methods of action slide 36 of:
http://www.neurotropebioscience.com/Welcome_to_Neurotrope_BioScience/HomePage-Forms/neurotrope%20feb2017%20light.pdf

Versus slide 3 of: http://www.anavex.com/my_uploads/170330_ADPD-Vienna_HH.pdf

The two slides actually skip over a lot of underlying complexity some of which there is controversy about and much of which I don't understand, and part of which neither companies researchers are probably certain about. Therefore, it is probably better to stick to the underlying question you are asking: Which method is better - NTRP or Anvavex3-71?

Looking at the bryostatin-1 mice data, it shows that those (Alzheimer's disease type of mice (AD mice) treated with bryostatin-1 are almost as healthy as untreated wild mice types(who don't have mice Alzheimer's disease) in "escape latency" tests on neurotrope's slide 34. Some of the results on the actual brain structure such as mushroom spines are also impressive. However, the brain is complex. In healthy brains, more is not always better and the brain "trims" unneeded spines whose growth is "spurious" or unneeded. Therefore, I think actual performance in tests is a better measurement. From the tests, bryostatin-1 treated AD mice perform almost as well as wild types. The test data is close enough that I think it is accurate to say that there is not any significant difference in performance between byrostatin-1 treated AD mice and wild mice.

For Anavex3-71, they are using rats. The rat data also is impressive. For that, I think we can come to the same conclusion. The Anavex3-71 treated AD rats show no significant difference in the tests. (They actually performed better but due to possible test variation, statistically speaking, I think it is accurate to say there is no statistical difference between wild rats and AD rats treated with Anavex3-71. Essentially the same result as bryostatin-1.

But getting down to details - the Anavex3-71 rats are given a dose that from the Anavex2-73 results is likely sustainable in humans. In other words, they are testing a dosage on rats which if put in human equivalent doses could be given to humans. Of course, we don't have any phase 2 results on Anavex3-71 so don't really know for sure if the side effects are minimal similar to Anavex2-73. If they are, then the dosing is a human sustainable dose.

For the Nuerotrope testing, I looked at some of the underlying papers on the mice. Using the dosages that they use, mice had visible abdominal cramps and they had hind legs which were "flacid" for 3 to 12 hours after being dosed.

Next, Anavex is testing drugs that are oral instead of IV. The rats had the drug or saline sprayed into their mouth. The nuerotrope mice had the drug injected into them.