Share
14,651 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 1583
clock Created with Sketch. 27/02/25
10:15
Share
Originally posted by samfiodiving:
↑
I watched the webinar late last night it was very clever how they put it together vote at the AGM one could say that there are a number of SH that just do not believe in the CEO anymore, Myself being one, but in saying that I am not in favour of the challenge group either and have voted accordingly. Yes we failed the physical part of the trial yes I accept this 2A we showed a reduction in our target marker being CD49d no we didn’t hit target but we found we did reduce numbers MRI to show that both muscle mass and fat fraction had actually either made slight improvement in muscle mass or stabilized and reduced the fat fraction normally seen in these boys. 9 boys in our 2A and each and every one of them went through the MRI process, SO WHY WAS IT LEFT OUT ?????? WHY Placebo up +18% It was a reduction of - 18% against Placebo - 35% reduction against the placebo result MRI as a secondary biomarker We could have seen drug V Placebo reduction in cd49d was there any difference between these boys at muscle level viewed through the process of MRI This is something we will never know WHY omit MRI from our trial I have been here for a substantial number of years now and always maintained that the drug has never let me down it has always been management that let me down YES COMPLETE failure due to lack of confirmation through MRI either way Like the omition of the MRI it was left out for a reason What was that reason The reaons given I do not believe substantiate its leaving out especially when it was such a vital part of our original reason for moving forwards anyway But we are all here today some with huge losses and moved on, some still here showing losses maybe not as huge as some other but still showing losses am I accusing of Cathryn of lying no way, what she delivered ref to MRI is what she thought was correct and backed her colleagues in But I beg to differ and challenge the reasoning s given I don’t want a load of excuses either as I have had previous when I have challenged the board for what I believe not to be in the best interest of your shareholders I voted in support of Charmaine only to stay on
Expand
I’m Please step up in the name of transparency and give true reasoning why MRI was not put into this trial as it was in the recent Duvyzat trial and got their ambulant boys with three times the numbers of our trial over the line with multi country clinics around the world And received accelerated approval by using MRI as a secondary endpoint set up as a bio marker Plus they have an ongoing trial in none ambulant again with three times the numbers in our trial throughout multiple countries and as the UHF have advised they are doing ongoing trials in none ambulant boys with DMD using MRI If you are not willing to come here and be transparent then i will be more than happy to eml a copy of this to you to put on your presentation at the AGM and please go through and give reasoning for all to hear I am no professional if I have made error on any clinical information posted then I will apologize if the need is warranted, for my lack of knowledge.But if I am correct then as a shareholder being put in the position I would like you as a board to repay that courtesy and apologies to all shareholders for your mistake by not including this in our trial and giving your shareholders the best shot at successI don’t want a load of excuses either as I have had previous when I have challenged the board for what I believe not to be in the best interest of your shareholders
(20min delay)