Registered Members Login:
   
Forgotten Your Details? Click Here To Recover +
Welcome To The ShareCafe Community - Talk Shares And Take Stock With Smart Investors - New Here? Click To Register >

4312 Pages (Click to Jump) V  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 > »    
 
  
Reply to this topic

CUV, CLINUVEL PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED
sharelooker
post Posted: Feb 15 2019, 03:09 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 351
Thanks: 1277


All Time High for CLVLY: $16.70!


Said 'Thanks' for this post: KRD  
 
johnnytech
post Posted: Feb 15 2019, 02:44 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 350
Thanks: 622


I watch the relational movement of CUV and CLVLY daily, and I'm seeing an unusual pattern recently. I have a real time ticker on my phone home screen. It's constantly in my view daily so this is based more on gut than hard data. For years and the last 12 months, every uptick/downtick of CUV is followed the next day by CLVLY uptick or downtick. They are in lockstep daily. But recently, in the last 30 days, these uptick/downticks are not in lockstep. Over the whole period, yes CLVLY mirrors the longer chart movement of CUV, but the daily uptick/downtick seems at least 50% if not more out of sync. Instead of the correction being 24 hours, it's 48 hours instead and thus the uptick/downtick are opposite day to day.

Not sure why, but an observation.


Said 'Thanks' for this post: xlnja  
 
FarmaZutical
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 11:22 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 496
Thanks: 1957



FDA Helps Streamline Approval Process for Supplemental Drug Indications

By Margot J. Fromer
December 25, 2017

ADVERTISEMENT

Get Permission

As researchers learn more about the natural history of cancers, as more drugs are effective for more types of the disease, and as the number and complexity of combination therapies increase, the more important it is that new drugs and permutations of old ones be available to patients.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been making efforts over the past several years to expedite drug approvals. How to streamline the review-and-approval process and, in turn, create more and better treatment options for patients was the overarching question posed recently in a panel discussion at the Friends of Cancer Research Annual Meeting held earlier this year in Washington, DC.


We need constant updates about how drugs and devices are performing, and we need to incorporate more real-world evidence into the regulatory process.
— Scott Gottlieb, MD

Tweet this quote
FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, said the agency and all its stakeholders have to think differently about how to apply regulations to new products. “We need constant updates about how drugs and devices are performing, and we need to incorporate more real-world evidence into the regulatory process.”

He added that the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence, headed by Richard Pazdur, MD, is applying new ways of thinking about drug development and regulation. The Center attempts to expedite oncology and hematology drugs and devices and to support an integrated approach in their clinical evaluation. “We have a dynamic regulatory environment,” said Dr. Pazdur. “There’s lots of back and forth with sponsors.”

What Happens to a New Indication

Every time a biopharmaceutical company (as a “sponsor”) seeks approval of a new indication for an already-approved drug, the FDA requires a supplemental new drug application (NDA) that consists of the same quality and content as the drug’s original new drug application. Its review and assessment are similar to the original dossier, but the process may not add much value to what the agency already knows about the drug’s safety and efficacy.


We have a dynamic regulatory environment. There’s lots of back and forth with sponsors.
— Richard Pazdur, MD

Tweet this quote
Panel members agreed that the wealth of high-quality data amassed for the original new drug application, plus what has been learned from postmarketing experience, should be considered when the drug is presented to the FDA for an additional indication.

How to Accomplish the Goals

George D. Demetri, MD, Quick Family Chair in Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, noted that the FDA approval is the gold standard for drugs all over the world. “We want to preserve that position while at the same time expand what that approval means and how it is accorded.”

George D. Demetri, MD
George D. Demetri, MD
More and more approved drugs are being used in multiple indications, and increasingly, supplemental new drug applications are being submitted using an intermediate endpoint as clinical benefit because the need is so critical.

“A supplemental new drug application can entail either a regular or accelerated approval,” said Amy McKee, MD, Supervisory Associate Director, FDA Office of Hematology and Oncology Products. “The agency may now grant full approval to a supplemental new drug application using an intermediate endpoint on a case-by-case basis. One reason is because we weigh the urgency of an unmet clinical need.”

Amy McKee, MD
Amy McKee, MD
For example, said Dr. McKee, daratumumab (Darzalex) was first approved for multiple myeloma in November 2015; a supplemental new drug application for another indication showed similar response rates, resulting in a second approval 1 year later—and a third only 7 months after that. “We were very comfortable with the speed at which all this happened. All the approvals were based on excellent response rates or progression-free survival.”

The panel discussed a framework that could analyze the characteristics that have led to full approval of drugs based on intermediate endpoints for a new indication.

Shanthi Ganeshan, PhD, Vice President and U.S. Head of Oncology Regulatory Affairs, Novartis, listed the benefits of using intermediate endpoints for drug approval: It streamlines and systematizes the process; there may be no need for confirmatory studies; preclearance for promotional materials is not necessary; and it encourages more supplementary applications.

Unmet Clinical Need

Urgency for filling a medical gap is a primary reason to approve a new indication. That is, how serious or life-threatening is the disease in question? How rare is it? What are the current treatment options, and how effective are they?

Shanthi Ganeshan, PhD
Shanthi Ganeshan, PhD
For example, a single-arm trial of the combination of daratumumab with pomalidomide (Pomalyst) and dexamethasone resulted in its approval for patients with refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least two prior therapies including lenalidomide (Revlimid) and a protease inhibitor such as bortezomib (Velcade). Of patients in the study, 89% were refractory to lenalidomide and 71% were refractory to bortezomib, with 64% of the group refractory to the combination of those two drugs. These patients were about out of treatment options. However, 59% of patients in a single-arm trial of the daratumumab-based combination achieved a response, with a median duration of 13.6 months, demonstrating a significant efficacy outcome.

Natural History of Disease

Understanding the natural history of a specific disease is critical when attempting to expand the use of an approved drug in a new setting. New molecular technologies can help in this effort because genomes, epigenomes, and transcriptomes can be unique to a single tumor type or shared across several tumors driven by the same or related pathogenic mechanisms.

For example, multiple oncogenic driver mutations and rearrangements have been identified in lung cancers and are currently targeted with different therapies, such as kinase inhibitors that have produced greater clinical benefit than platinum-based chemotherapy.

Drug Actions in Different Diseases

To expand a drug’s use, one must understand its pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and interactions with other drugs—as a single agent and in combinations. For example, dabrafenib- -(Tafinlar) and trametinib (Mekinist) are kinase inhibitors that modulate two independent targets in a particular pathway. Together they have been successful in treating BRAF V600–mutant metastatic melanoma and metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, when the combination was used in BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer, it conferred a poor prognosis and only a modest response rate, according to the panel.

Thus, although the mechanism of action of these kinase inhibitors was well understood and efficacy had been demonstrated in previous controlled trials, a more detailed preclinical investigation of the drug’s pharmacodynamics and tissue-unique mechanisms of resistance showed how the drugs performed in a new indication.

Safety Issues

Supplemental new drug applications require sponsors to submit a safety profile in the new population as well as provide comparisons with previously approved indications. A supplemental new drug application is more likely to be approved when safety data mirror the original indication, thus demonstrating that the drug behaves similarly in both settings.

Dabrafenib and trametinib, used in combination, was granted full approval in metastatic NSCLC, in addition to metastatic melanoma, in part because of the similar safety profile observed in both diseases. ■


Said 'Thanks' for this post: sharelooker  
 
investek
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 09:33 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 191
Thanks: 728


In Reply To: sharelooker's post @ Feb 14 2019, 08:36 PM

My understanding is that CommSec will allow some degree of Margin Loan against CUV stock however not when holding the stock in isolation.

You would be required to hold a diversified portfolio (Portfolio LVR (5 or more securities with Standard LVR) plus your CUV stock and CommSec would allow a margin loan for 40% of the total value of your portfolio. I’m not sure what % each stock would need to represent for the portfolio to qualify as ‘diversified’ however I doubt 1 share of CBA, BHP, WES, WBC, & RIO + a tonne of CUV shares would qualify, you may need to contact CommSec directly.

FYI CUV has been listed like this for some time (6mths?), I’ve been monitoring it from time to time waiting for CommSec to give CUV a single/standard LVR.

From the pdf:
“Portfolio LVR (PLVR) is enabled in diversified portfolios with 5 or more securities with Standard LVR.”




Said 'Thanks' for this post: sharelooker  
 
sharelooker
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 08:36 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 351
Thanks: 1277


Does anyone know what this means?

Bold and Italics : Indicates Bonus stocks (LVR is applicable for diversified portfolios)

https://www.commsecadviserservices.com.au/m...-securities.pdf

 
investek
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 03:38 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 191
Thanks: 728


In Reply To: Verharven's post @ Feb 14 2019, 09:53 AM

I’d be supportive of a split for the reasons already mentioned below however it might not be as simple a decision as it seems...

I recall various NASDAQ market designations have particular requirements/thresholds for the share price, see below/link. For the top tiers I believe a bid price of $4 is required so this may not be considered until CUV trades consistently above $40 for some period (that said they could obviously choose to do a smaller split e.g. 5:1).
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/assets/initialguide.pdf

There is also the consideration of larger NASDAQ fees if a greater number of shares are on issue.

Regardless, I’m sure Wolgen and Keamy are all over this and have a plan (is addition to NASDAQ Global Select Market more important than a split? Do they wish to attract more Aussie punters or more US instos?), however as usual I don’t expect we will find out what that plan is until it is implemented.
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image

Attached Image

Attached Image


 



Said 'Thanks' for this post: xray  
 


Verharven
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 11:50 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 588
Thanks: 1417


In Reply To: LRR's post @ Feb 14 2019, 11:28 AM

Yes, for any serious investor the price is irrelevant as is just a number and going from $2 to $20 is no different from going from $20 to $200 though in Australia, there are plenty of 'mum and dad' investors who think stocks $20 and above are 'expensive' - would not believe how many times I've heard that! Thank god they don't live in America where $100+ is the accepted norm for many blue-chip stocks so hopefully, we're slowly moving to that way of thinking now with stocks like CBA around $70 and Macquarie, Cochlear, and CSL well into the $100 zone.


Said 'Thanks' for this post: xray  investek  
 
LRR
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 11:28 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 218
Thanks: 112


I'm of 2 minds on the 10:1 consolidation .. although it helped originally legitimize CUV away from a penny stock, it does create that big number ceiling (to a point) .. i'd much prefer the price to be $2.50 (split out) then $25. feels like more of SP potential smile.gif


Said 'Thanks' for this post: xray  investek  
 
Verharven
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 09:53 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 588
Thanks: 1417


In Reply To: xray's post @ Feb 14 2019, 09:48 AM

I'd be supportive of it as ridiculous they ever did that 10:1 consolidation in the first place 10 years back


Said 'Thanks' for this post: xray  investek  
 
xray
post Posted: Feb 14 2019, 09:48 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 338
Thanks: 570


In Reply To: Verharven's post @ Feb 14 2019, 09:25 AM

Anyone think a 10 for 1 split would be worth while soon?

 
 


4312 Pages (Click to Jump) V  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 > » 

Back To Top Of Page
Reply to this topic


You agree through the use of ShareCafe, that you understand and accept the TERMS OF USE.


TERMS OF USE  -  CONTACT ADMIN  -  ADVERTISING