Your first sentence appears to be correct. Regarding the second, AVXL PR'ed 5-wk PK/PD on January 11, well before either of the AAIC 2016 deadlines on Feb 3 and May 2.
That will only be the case if partnership is announced before AAIC, because the data is definitely being released at AAIC.
Company is awaiting availability of data, not readiness of data. Poster title makes clear that AAIC embargo is what currently prevents availability, not the PK/PD analytical process itself, which should be complete according to normal PK/PD timeline. Week five PK/PD analysis took 2-3 months.
Me too, within the scope of what I have to spend on it. Crazy to me that shareholders have responded to the poster title in such ho-hum fashion (though no surprise about the basher responses, obviously). I guess most people still don't get that the poster refers to new efficacy data and new PK/PD analysis. Or maybe they believe the basher claims that open-trial data is meaningless (even when it's statistically significant in many measures in a trial not powered for statistical significance). Whatever the case may be, I'm glad to have the cheap shares, and ready to buy more if we're heading lower.
Wrong, AVXL PR'ed the 5-wk PK/PD on January 11th. And regardless of when AVXL submitted (most likely closer to the May 2nd late-breaking deadline rather than the Feb 3rd regular deadline), no AAIC material may be published or broadcast any time before the AAIC presentation date.
It is not possible that the poster title reflects a presentation of wk-5 efficacy data and PK/PD analysis. It is wk-12 efficacy data and PK/PD analysis.
Combine that title with the fact that AAIC policies state that submission may not be published or broadcast before the conference, and you can see that the title has to refer to 12-wk efficacy data and PK/PD analysis, because 5-wk efficacy data and PK/PD analysis has already been published and broadcast.
To see AAIC policies, just google those two words and note especially the second paragraph under the heading "News Embargo Policy and Confidentiality Agreement"
Ergo, this poster represents 12-wk data at a minimum. It may or may not include partial or complete 26-wk data. Based on past scientific presentations, it will probably include partial 26-wk data.
We know exactly when we will see the data: July 24, 2016. Presentation of 12-wk efficacy data and PK/PD analysis at AAIC 2016 has been confirmed by the Anavex poster title in the 2016 AAIC program that has been released online.
No, it is possible that Anavex could do a podium presentation in addition to a poster presentation. The poster clearly involves PK/PD analysis of the 12-wk efficacy data (dose dependence), but there could be a separate presentation to focus on the raw 12-wk efficacy data without reference to the PK/PD analysis. My expectation is that both are wrapped up in this poster, but we shall see.
I am no more playing with words than you are. There are 28 other posters in Anavex's session, not hundreds. Anavex presented a poster last year and it was great. What matters is the content, not whether it is presented on a poster or on slides at a podium.
I'm not worried about anything, but why not discuss the upcoming AAIC presentation? Are you not interested to see 12-wk efficacy and PK/PD data, especially given that dose dependent clinical cognitive improvement in MMSE and other markers was observed? I am happy to anticipate p2 for Rett and p3 for Alz as well, but I do not consider the presentation or a partnership to be useless, and I doubt the company does either.
I take it you have not seen yet that the data is being released at AAIC in late July. It cannot be reported before then due to AAIC embargo policies.
I just bought more today as well. Strange to me that no one here is able to see that this poster represents new data, both efficacy and PK/PD, and that the new data is positive (dose-dependent clinical cognitive improvement observed in MMSE and other markers)
Because dose-dependence debunks the placebo-effect argument. Correlating a greater degree of improvement with the 50mg arm versus the 30mg arm is valuable to the company, and it is obvious from the presentation title that such a correlation was achieved in the 12-wk PK/PD analysis.
They did not have to register months ago. Late-breaking deadline was May 2nd. The title is not a placeholder. AAIC does not accept placeholder submissions. So Anavex obviously submitted at the late-breaking deadline, not the Feb 3 deadline, which is more for discussion panels/plenary sessions.
It is definitely new data, because AAIC embargo policy does not allow old data. The 12-wk PK/PD analysis also assessed dose-dependency (as Part B has two dosage arms, 30mg and 50mg). From the title, the analysis obviously found that the 50mg dosage correlated with cognitive improvement seen in the 12-wk efficacy data in MMSE and other cognitive markers (such as ADCS-ADL, which we already know from Barcelona showed strong improvement at 12 weeks).
I never said it was a podium presentation. Please read what I actually did say -- poster presentation. Just like last year. Just like I said. Poster presentation is fine by me as long as the data is good, which it obviously is from the title.
Be amazed. It takes a long time. However, the current reason for data delay is the AAIC embargo, as we know from the title of the Anavex poster presentation this year. It took a long time to do the PK/PD analysis, and then once they had the analysis, they obviously submitted it for inclusion at AAIC and were accepted, so now even though they have the analysis, it is not yet available to the public due to the AAIC embargo. The title of the presentation makes clear that the analysis is positive, however.
We know from AAIC embargo policies that the data is new. Does not need to say 12/26 weeks in the title in order to know that. AAIC would not accept a rehash of 5-wk data. It is a conference for new findings only.