Replies to post #121172 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[nidan7500]

Nice.

Tip of the iceberg is right - we are only beginning to understand but the more data we get, the more questions seem to arise? The mystery unravels just as it gets more complicated, it would seem

Dr. P.Senge describes the three levels of knowledge.

1. The things we know.

2. The things we do not know, but we know we do not know them.

3. The things we do not know we do not know.

[OFP]

The obvious problem with this "tip of the iceberg" sentiment is that it is a recognition that the MOA is not known. Directly following from it is that the MOA narrative the company has been pushing including pretty much ALL their preclinical testing and claims of cellular homeostasis become moot.

Of course a compound tested without a logical MOA is really a shot in the dark. A priori probabilities are shot....with confidence in any finding reduced.

[Cbdpotential]

Come a long way... ;-)
"IT would be interesting to know further how the cannabinoid system is involved in regulating neuronal homeostasis and I think there have been several articles pointing to how 2-73 plays a role in the endo-cannabinoid system - of which we are just scratching the surface in our understanding. Watch to see more mention of the endo-cannabinoid system and its role in "Cellular homeostasis" theory that Anavex is actively promoting."

[hnbadger1]

I have a pretty basic question. Does a drug's MOA Have to be fully "understood " before the FDA will approve it for use?
Are there some approved drugs on the market that work , but researchers do not really understand the real reason WHY they work.

TIA

[frrol]

Sorry, I see you already made that qualification earlier.

[frrol]

Agree. I think the company does a disservice by focusing on S1 agonism, given 2-73 is (apparently from some research) not a potent agonist relative to other known compounds. That research could be just incomplete of course, or even flawed. Nevertheless, I suspect 2-73 effectiveness would reside in its pluripotent agonism, which the company or any independent research hasn't really established. They've gotten hints of it. But what the company is doing right is pushing to prove efficacy, which is where the proverbial rubber hits the road. Which is why an update on the Part C, or start of the Phase 2/3, or results from the Rett Phase 2, are so anticipated.

[MycroftHolmes]

Re: S1 agonism

A quick question: what is meant by strength of SR-1 response? I mean to say, are you referring to binding affinity, magnitude of a given response, or other?

Thank you for your knowledgeable posts.

Cheers

Mycroft