pab research summary #1

I've been trawling the biopharma market, looking for one to stand out. PAB was my choice, and here's why:


1.

They publish their data in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The professor leading the charge:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=HENSEL%20F[auth]

PAT-SC1:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3926647/#!po=40.625

Publications to date:
http://www.patrys.com/product-pipeline/scientific-publications


1.2

The published science shows good stuff. Taken from the PAT-SC1 Ten-year follow up publication:

"In conclusion, the human IgM antibody PAT-SC1 induces highly specific apoptosis in tumour cells expressing the tumour-specific variant of CD55. In contrast to other therapeutic antibodies against solid tumours, the PAT-SC1 antibody is well tolerated by patients. The expression of CD55PAT-SC1 can easily be determined in preoperative biopsies, which offers a novel patient- and tumour-specific neoadjuvant therapy for GC."


1.3.1

Stomach cancer sucks (ethical investment).

700,000 deaths a year, 5-year survival rate of <5 to 15%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stomach_cancer


1.3.2

Multiple Myeloma sucks (ethical investment).

"a median survival (in 2005) of 62 months for stage 1 disease, 45 months for stage 2 disease, and 29 months for stage 3 disease."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_myeloma#Prognosis



1.4

They have a long established network with academia.





2.

Ample cash reserves in bank with Amgen backing the clinical study through their subsidiary OnyX Pharmaceuticals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amgen

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onyx_Pharmaceuticals


2.1

Onyx Pharmaceuticals specializes in developing and marketing medicines for the treatment of cancer, with a proven track record of bringing therapeutics to market.


2.1.1

Onyx was taken over by Amgen.



2.2

They have big pharma in their pocket.



3.

So, this led me to review their offerings of "Natural Human Antibodies".

3.1

Natural Human Antibodies, are Abs taken from people directly.


3.1.1

They are safer than Lab created & untested Abs.


3.1.2

They are more "on target" than Lab created & untested Abs.


3.2

Multiple products in pipeline:

http://www.patrys.com/product-pipeline/complete-product-pipeline







4. So,

Safer= less risk.

more on target = less risk.

Cashed up = less risk.

Multiple Products in pipeline = less risk.

Networked with academia = greater ability.

Networked with big pharma = greater tempo.



Combining this info with PAT-SM6's orphan drug status in the EU and big pharma's appetite for acquisitions, is why my sentiment is LT Buy.




As a first time poster, and a scientist by trade (hence I've only penny's to dance with for now), I welcome your feedback on my initial foray into this community. Please berate and harshly criticize, as appropriate. I've much to learn on market dynamics, and the finer points of wealth expansion. Although, I have learnt the following acronyms: IMHO, and DYOR.