Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[Investor2014]

At CTAD December 2016 MacFarlane presented 9 and 12 months data, but why they chose to record 31 and 41 week data in the May 2017 SEC filing is left to guessing.

Could it be that, as per the CTAD December 2016 slide 29, the 31 and 41 week MMSE scores are better than the 57 week point? Although on the same slide the 57 week ADCS-ADL score appears ever so slightly better.

Another thing that puzzles me about slide 32 "Examples of MMSE "Strong" patient Responders" in that same Dec 2016 presentation, is the jumpiness of at least the light blue and faint orange results.

Altogether it is true that those 6 strong responders are all improved at 57 weeks over their baseline. The light blue graph in particular looks odd starting with a 20 baseline score and rocketing to 26 at 41 weeks, to then crash back to 20 at 52 weeks and end at 25 at 57 weeks. Also, the faint orange graph has a baseline of 20 rising to 22.5 at 31 weeks, to then fall to 19 at 41 weeks and ending at 22 at 57 weeks.

Begs the question how those graphs continue even just beyond 57 weeks?

Then there is the disappeared infamous 15-months abstract, where we could briefly read the following:

Conclusion: The safety of ANAVEX2-73 was assessed and MTD was determined. Despite not optimal dosing, both cognitive and functional performance is sustained over at least 12 months, suggesting that the effect of the compound does not seem to worsen AD symptoms with repeated dosing. In a progressive disease this is considered a positive outcome. The data support further clinicla development of ANAVEX2-73 and preparation for a larger confirmatory study is underway.

Why do they say ..."at least 12 months"...and not 13, 14 or 15 months? Then what exactly happened beyond 12 months?

Some will no doubt conclude I am bashing now. I am not, but as a long - possibly too long Anavex share holder, these questions do make me loose just a tiny bit of sleep.