Share price, page-17

thanks SB,

I should declare my position in this firstly and not so sure about one of the best, others provide much better insights that I enjoy reading.

Private investor like most.
I probably have a long sight on this and here is my thinking.
Having said that I was very surprised that it has come back to 46c. In my mind I probably saw 60c being the low point prior to the MTD update. So firstly-

as harvett has said what has really changed here?

On the negative- well nothing bad in the short story from KZA other than and this is the underwhelming part the numbers and the fact it has been extended.

On the positive- as detailed by many better than I can evaluate, the numbers are interesting for the low patient head count but, the percentage wise argument would be IMO high in that they show (interim only)-
Part A is expected to enroll between 3 and 42 patients
At the present time, the study has enrolled 10 patients in Part A

To me this part was disappointing in that they could have elaborated on why the number was low, given that they say it is expected to enrol more. Was it due to the toleration so that they managed to go pretty much straight through. To me this was important and this was probably where I would have seeked further inputs from our scientific advisory members. At this point I see a failure simply in building upon the good results they have very quickly summarised.

So for my simple math if you use 10 and 2 drop out prior to starting the course then the 3 (or 37.5%), that have achieved SD is a telling stat, and pretty outstanding in my book when you consider that these patients are staring at no other option, and that is the sad reality.

But more telling is the “after 2 cycles of Cantrixil monotherapy” now to me this appears to suggest that if you have a very conservative team making an announcement of that strength the observations appear very sound. After 2 cycles.

One patient, (12.5% of the study), demonstrated a ‘partial response’ (PR) after receiving Cantrixil in combination with chemotherapy.
3 patients, (37% of the study), have so far completed the full twenty-four weeks of dosing allowed for in the protocol.
I know from my own experience with chemo & radio & surgery that after I finished the chemo & radio they observed my tumour for another 6 weeks to determine whether it was reducing. So my timeline is based around personal experiences to my own case, as in head & neck late stage.
Also from a close friend of my wife who passed away with ovarian cancer, we show what looked good after early intervention and then 18 months later to watch her quickly go was extremely hard to bear.
So enough of the background, but for all the reasons herein in summary- yes the PR is very disappointing. For many of us this has been a long journey, more so for some. KZA in my opinion have failed in as much as they have not taken us on this long journey. There is a way not to inform but still embrace and hold everyone together as the story develops and unfolds. Sadly the PR is missing and I can’t fault the CEO for this other than to say please do not repeat the long silence we endured at the start of his tenure.
This is a time to include shareholders in the discussions and bring us on board.
In answer to your question SB, I see myself in a longer play our major shareholder is not building up a war chest to just watch a couple of cent fall at his feet. MEIP have great suggest on the earlier version of Cantrixil for me there just are many good reasons for me to stay.