Cogstate Podcast, page-3

@tomhagen

I agree it was good and maybe what I have ascribed as knowledge gaps were just issues of time limits and editing. Here are some of the things I would like to have seen included.

- Value of the minimum payments from the Eisai contract was not highlighted ($45 million) only the upfront payment was highlighted ($15 million)

- There was no mention of the data sharing aspect of this contract, this is huge and will allow them to improve test sensibility and thus the moat

- There was no mention of Cogmate/Knownou now being preinstalled on the Raku-Raku smartphone in Japan, this will increase the potential consumer reach by many millions and again improve test and when combined with other data, longitudinally, may provide other insights

- No mention of the roll out of the first voice based test, these have huge potential both for traditional cognitive testing but also in so many other
areas such as measurement of things that are currently qualitative and not quantitive for example stress, pain and fatigue

- I would of highlighted the big moves by pharma back in to the CNS space having given up on the space for many years. These are longterm strategic moves backed by huge dollar follows and are unlikely to be reversed easily.

- The FDA is starting to mandate Cognitive testing, as a safety endpoint in many non CNS conditions, the link with ERT and the success in the rare paediatric space highlight this potential.

- There was no mention of the potential of acquisition which the company has suggested they would consider if a suitable target was found.

- There was no mention of valuation CZZ figures (which are always light) are at p/ebit 20.4x this year, 11.83x next and 7.96x FY24 and on P/CF 24.4 x this year, 13.8x next and 14.4x FY24.

- They did not seem to know the answer to the sensitivity question and it depends on which test, but on an unsupervised basis (i.e at home on a laptop of phone) the tests have an accuracy of between @92% and 97% when compared to a pencil and paper test with a rater in attendance.

- They seemed unaware of Roche's Gantenerumab which also has FDA breaktrough designation for AD

- One aspect of the digital test they did not touch upon, is it is much easier to collect more regular longitudinal data, this is much richer and provides much grater insight in to the burden of a disease and the effect of a drug on a disease.

- Another part of the business model that was not mentioned is that generally when a company makes a choice of cognitive test, it would be very unusual (and require regulatory explanation) to change that test as it progresses through the trials process. So a small pre clinical or Phase I contract can end up being worth many multiples of the value if it is successful on the regulatory pathway

- There was no exploration of the high likelihood that we will see amyloid clearing drugs (and other approaches if approved) trialed in combination with well known and approved (or soon to be approved) pro cognitives. These are principally Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors and would include currently prescribed AD symptomatic drugs such as Donepezil (Aricept an Eisai drug) and Galantamine. One of the problems with these drugs is they are hard to tolerate from a GI perspective. But new prodrug version that are in development seem to eliminate many of the side effects. The potential exists, in combination, to have meaningful impact on the speed of progression and the quality of life for AD suffers and their families. Modanfinil might also be an interesting candidate although that is far more speculative at this point.

I guess that is a decent starting point.