Ann: Pancreatic cancer clinical study update, page-15

Froghope,

One of the most articulated +ve posts I've ever seen on OSL!
' if tumor is not vascular' - 100% correct, and one of the reasons why their treatments have not expanded to other indications quickly. Although you will be aware of the very successful Kidney phase 1 trial (phase II in the next few months), and the patent last year for Lung Cancer, both by SRX. It is slow slow stuff dealing with cancer.

I would agree with your view of companies having narrow vision - stick to the knitting sort of mentality. That is why we need new young companies that can challenge the status quo.

'Success in the clinical trial is highly probable.' - that is highly speculative to say the least, and is as yo say you have been involved in the industry for many years you would have a good idea of the success rate for novel treatments. History is littered with phase II or III trials that have failed despite outstanding results on the bench or at phase I.

One of the main issues is that a small phase I can be done at one centre often with only one particular medic being involved. They can build up a very specalised skill set that may yield results. Transferring this skill set to multiple medics in multiple centres during a trial can yield most unpredictable results. Thus devices are a very difficult game to play in compared to pharma.

'Are there really delays in product development process and CE certification? I think not - I believe that unrealistic expectations have been raised in shareholders and that's why it seems to be taking longer than it should.'

Yes indeed - 100% correct. Unfortunately this was been at the behest of senior management who have ramped the hell out of the company with soft promises that always were totally unrealistic. The sad thing is that with a few ex SRX and other experienced executives / board members, these people know better and thus I must conclude it was deliberate deceitfulness to extract $ from the punters. If one can't have any trust in the management of a company then one must discount any valuation, IMO.

At 5c, I think there could be some value as a long term punt. I think they will be back for some more $ by the end of 2017, as I think they have underestimated the costs of going into trial and regulatory efforts, Not forgetting that post the initial 20 pts, they will then have to ramp up many centres and train those medics - a painfully slow and expensive process at times. I assume that they will be restricted to facilities with Nuc Med capabilities - e.g. medium to large hospitals and probably the same ones that are using SRX / BTG product.

Anyhow, good to have a reasonable debate rather than one line ramps / personal attacks.
Best