Replies to post #197663 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[nidan7500]

Xena:If genes affecting ABC are involved then we might get good results with A and incomplete results with B&C but still exceed SOC en toto

You are of course describing the (a) learning process. We all understand it is iterative. Many ways to describe what happens during discovery. The dilemma in the CNS space has been the regulatory bodies processes somehow truncated the entire point of this concept. That is the most generous description I can come up with for how the Amyloid thesis went on for 30+ years and hundreds of trials and/1000's of dead trial participants. Not to beat a dead hose but that failure rate was the indicator that the process was going no where and to STOP.

What we have with Anavex is an opportunity to do the CNS disease problem solving process correctly, if we are allowed to. Dr.G. stopped the carnage by stopping the Amyloid thesis (IMO) b/c he could see nothing being learned. It had to be done. Sad to say the same structure for trials is more or less still in place. It has to be taken apart of redesigned b/c it is fundamentally incompatible w/learning and there is a limit to how many "stove pipe" processes that can be done/afforded at any time. It is a self limiting construct.

I like the Dr. Senge's model of learning and see that A2-73 trials are now at level 2. We are in a position to begin to understand what we know we do not know.(YET) It is at this interface that learning occurs. If somehow the use of new tools and technology can be applied (either in sequence or concurrently) then a vast number of simultaneous breakthroughs is possible (flashover). A2-73 trails might be seen as a true catalyst in the space if allowed. Trial data that describes a treated patients responses to light or sound or other stimulus (measured in pico secs) or may be extrapolated to changes in patient cognition which can be monitored (and learned from) w/precision. This type of learning will then trigger other new ideas and WHAMM ...learning happens. This is my opinion of what I think we are on the brink of doing here.

This is process (or should be) all about learning. W/O A2-73 and a few good people in the right places in time it will not happen. What a shame if we let this go by again. If not US Then WHO? If Not now then When? Lead, follow or get out of the way. ...I'll think of a few more for Monday's post.

[Boopka]

Xena, I am in total agreement. Anavex's MOA also can create strong interest from BP players because some may feel that 2-73 offers great combination therapies with their candidates. If the MOA is proven successful potential partners may be lining outside Missling's door very soon. GLTA

[ClosetInvestor]

“We know there has been a measure of success in the P2a.” - In an open, small trial where patients knew they were taking the drug. I wouldn’t call that a “measure of success” that we know.