Just to add a little more detail into greggaways initial...

Just to add a little more detail into greggaways initial post...

Yes our Chairman Lucy turnbull opened proceedings by saying that the goal of PRR is to retain the profits of the commercialisation of cvac onshore in Australia as many other biotechs have been swallowed up buy larger global concerns.

It would be a shame for us to get taken over if the trials are successful as this technology really puts us at the forefront of global cancer research.

At the current SP market cap less cash backing is valuing cvac at around 100 million dollars.

Seems undervalued to me even at this point in the trials and listing in the US could expose us to some predatory accumulators IMHO.

Martin described dealing with the SEC as a "lessson in patience" and reiterated the companys intention nevertheless.

With regards to knocks off and generic competitors we have the patents for cvac locked in until 2023 and it cannot be manufactured generically.

The PRR medical team is very experienced with Neil Fraser having achieved 10/10 FDA approvals on his CV.

Sharron Gargosky has achieved 3/3 orphan drug approvals with the FDA. She is busy right now getting ethics agreeements with 150 different hospitals organised for the phase lll trials.* pass the panadol*

With regard to Dubai it only acccounts for 1% of global oncology sales so the company doesn't seem to be expecting too much. Still waiting on manufacturing approval "soon" from the TGA in AUS as the cvac for Dubai will be shipped from AUS.

Looking at first sales in Q12012 so we a bit behind schedule on this..lets hope the beauracrats in the TGA get this sorted before they go make sandcastles.Hopefully they aren't on an SEC type work schedule.

Just with regard to what we are trying to do here ovarian has the second highest morbidity rate of all cancers after pancreatic cancer as it micrometastises rapidly causing death.

We are up against a very agressive form of cancer. The advantage of our technology over Dendreons provenge is that cvac is administered subcutaneuosly rather than provenge which is administered intraveneously. The huge majority of immune responses are generated just under the skin as this is our first line of defence against infection. This is a considerable technological product advantage.


In terms of a cost benefit analysis for cvac versus chemotherapy the average cost of hospitalistion and treatment is between 80-120k for chemo..it ain't cheap either.

And then we have to look at survivability issues and quality of life.


Getting down to the nitty gritty PRR is expecting initial results from the llb trials around June 2012 or perhaps 6-9 months after. At this stage all the patients are in good health so we may have longer to wait.

With regard to stage lll it is completely blind for patients in first remisson whose immune systems will have been least compromised by chemotherapy. Not even the prescribing doctors know who has received the real vaccine.

Going up from 192 patients to 800 the trial is designed to give 90% confidence of the statistical outcome of cvac efficacy.

Given that the control arm will have no idea whether they have received cvac from an ethical standpoint if the patients not receiving the vaccine start to recurr the trial may be halted by the medical safety board monitoring the trial.

Given ovarian cancer is so agressive without any control this could happen as early as mid 2013.

With regard to the Cripto 1 research Martin seemed to be suggesting this technology could be licensed to another company for development or PRR may pursue the investigational new drug development.Stay tuned.

Finally with regard to the adaptation of cvac to fight other forms of cancer Martin said the company may look to partner with other specialist cancer treatment companies and engage in licensing arrangements for the propriety cvac tachnology in the future as an additional source of revenue.