contentSlug

type

ContentSlug_ContentQuery

slug

ContentPageContentQuery

content

trendingContent

query ContentSlug_ContentQuery(
  $contentSlug: String!
  $type: [ContentType!]
) {
  ...ContentPageContentQuery_13QmVO
}

fragment CompanyDetails_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  companies {
    name
    description
    pageUrl
    id
  }
}

fragment ContentBasicInfo on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  id
  type
  title
  lang
  companies {
    viewerIsFollowing
    id
    name
    pageUrl
  }
  tags {
    viewerIsFollowing
    id
    name
    pageUrl
  }
  ...PublishingDetails
  ...Reactions
}

fragment ContentMetadata on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  type
  title
  lang
  pageUrl
  alternatePageUrls: translations {
    __typename
    pageUrl
    lang
  }
  imgUrl
  description
  ... on Video {
    liveTime
    videoUrl
  }
  ... on Webcast {
    liveTime
    videoUrl
  }
}

fragment ContentPageContentQuery_13QmVO on Query {
  content(slug: $contentSlug, type: $type) {
    __typename
    id
    type
    title
    isPremium
    lang
    htmlBody
    summary
    companies {
      forum {
        latestPosts {
          ...ForumPosts
        }
      }
      name
      id
      viewerIsFollowing
      pageUrl
      defaultInstrument {
        isin
        id
        marketOpen
        marketClose
        marketplace {
          region
        }
        returns {
          total
        }
      }
    }
    tags {
      viewerIsFollowing
      id
      name
      pageUrl
    }
    createdAt
    ... on Video {
      liveTime
    }
    ... on Webcast {
      liveTime
    }
    slug
    ... on CompanyReport {
      reportUrl
    }
    ... on ThirdPartyCompanyReport {
      reportUrl
    }
    ... on StockExchangeRelease {
      reportUrl
    }
    ...ContentBasicInfo
    ...ContentMetadata
    ...PriceAndRecommendation_Content
    ...CompanyDetails_Content
    ...ReportLink_Content
    ...KeyFigures_Content
  }
  ...TrendingContent_1jQ2Cn
}

fragment ForumPosts on ForumPost {
  text
  likesCount
  url
  author
  postedAt
  authorImgUrl
}

fragment KeyFigures_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  companies {
    defaultInstrument {
      estimateData {
        modelType
        reportingCurrency
      }
      snapshot {
        transaction {
          date
          actualized {
            year
            quarter
            revenue
            revenueGrowth
            ebitAdjusted
            ebitReported
            ebitda
            enterpriseValue
            epsAdjusted
            dividend
            dividendYield
            sharePrice
          }
          estimates {
            year
            quarter
            revenue
            revenueGrowth
            ebitAdjusted
            ebitReported
            ebitda
            enterpriseValue
            epsAdjusted
            dividend
            dividendYield
            sharePrice
          }
        }
      }
      id
    }
    id
  }
}

fragment PriceAndRecommendation_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  createdAt
  companies {
    name
    pageUrl
    defaultInstrument {
      priceData {
        tradeCurrency
      }
      snapshot {
        priceData {
          date
          lastPrice
          tradeCurrency
        }
        transaction {
          date
          recommendation
          targetPrice
        }
        prevTransaction {
          recommendation
        }
      }
      id
    }
    id
  }
}

fragment PublishingDetails on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  createdAt
  publishers {
    name
    imgUrl
  }
  authors {
    __typename
    id
    name
    slug
    imgUrl
    jobTitle
  }
  ... on Video {
    liveTime
  }
  ... on Webcast {
    liveTime
  }
}

fragment Reactions on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  id
  reactionGroups {
    reactionType
    reactionsCount
    viewerReacted
  }
}

fragment ReportLink_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  type
  isPremium
  ... on CompanyReport {
    reportUrl
  }
  ... on ThirdPartyCompanyReport {
    reportUrl
  }
  ... on StockExchangeRelease {
    reportUrl
  }
}

fragment TrendingContent_1jQ2Cn on Query {
  trendingContent(type: ARTICLE) {
    __typename
    id
    title
    lang
    pageUrl
    createdAt
    type
    imgUrl
    companies {
      squareLogoUrl
      name
      id
    }
    authors {
      __typename
      imgUrl
      id
    }
    publishers {
      imgUrl
    }
  }
}


__typename

title

isPremium

lang

htmlBody

summary

companies

createdAt

publishers

authors

reactionGroups

pageUrl

translations

imgUrl

description

Analyst

Antti Siltanen

Faron is a global, clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, focused on tackling cancers via novel immunotherapies. Its mission is to bring the promise of immunotherapy to a broader population by uncovering novel ways to control and harness the power of the immune system. The Company's lead asset is bexmarilimab, a novel anti-Clever-1 humanized antibody, with the potential to remove immunosuppression of cancers through reprogramming myeloid cell function. Bexmarilimab is being investigated in Phase I/II clinical trials as a potential therapy for patients with hematological cancers in combination with other standard treatments.

So all 700 biotechs report more clearly? And Zeidan reported results that are the same as with just aza… oh come on.

Lest there be a misunderstanding, this interpretation is false concerning the TP53 mutation. Furthermore, your interpretation only applies to HR MDS wt patients. In addition, your interpretation focuses on CR.

I heard it exactly as stated. This has certainly not been made easy for investors, as the texts are full of composite CR and CR figures, IWG2006 and IWG2023 criteria, and TP53 subgroups all mixed up. Here’s how it goes for the first line: IWG2006:  CR 45%  WtTP53 CR: 20%  mTP53 CR: 70% IWG2023: composite CR 55% (in Zeidan’s video above, according to the abstract this figure was for wtTP53 and mTP53 would have been 44%)  CR 30% (this was new information at least) The difference must come from IWG2006 being investigator assessed and IWG2023 being central assessment. Meaning different people evaluate the result. I believe the background of the difference is the short-term CRs of transplant recipients, which do not pass independent review. Let’s also remember that in the IWG2023 criteria, the Hb threshold has been lowered for CR, so it is easier to achieve than with the 2006 criteria; the percentages are thus precisely the other way around. I assume here that the 30% CR mentioned by Zeidan also includes CRequivalent. I don’t know if anyone can still follow this. Let’s just say in plain language that the responses with bex+aza are at the same level as with aza alone when treating research patients.

I understand. From some Faron material, I had already inferred that NGS would have been used. I interpret that old samples have been dug up for more detailed analysis and then TP53m was found.

Starting from 2min50sec in the video, some very interesting information about first-line responses is heard. According to what I heard, the first-line composite CR responses were 55% and CR responses were 30% according to IWG2023 criteria. A moment after that, it is stated that the CR response for TP53 mutants was 70%. To me, there is a contradiction in these numbers; please tell me if I heard/understood what was said in the video incorrectly.

Everything matters, but how relevant, I don’t know. This connection came to mind when I came across Syndax’s Beat-AML study on X. In it, MRD negativity was 100% by flow cytometry but only 31% by NGS.  Probably in biotech, it only applies before patent granting. The structure of the investigational drug must indeed be known to all parties. Regarding clinical results: I can’t see how precise reporting would benefit competitors - at least no more than Faron itself. Most biotechs I’ve familiarized myself with report clinical results in more detail than Faron.

I asked because I was wondering if the research method is at all relevant information for an investor. Apparently not? I find several sources according to which TP53m allelic status cannot be reliably obtained with the VAF method, but NGS is needed. “… cases with seemingly monoallelic TP53^MT likely contain cryptic clones with biallelic TP53 inactivation, but their detection is not possible using traditional sequencing methods. Even after estimating the clonality of del17p or uniparental disomy (UPD), such TP53 configuration analysis is hampered by essential flaws such as the inability to: i) detect and quantify the biallelic fraction in cases with smaller variant allelic frequency (VAF) or ii) prove the presence of subclonal mosaicisms with two different TP53 mutant clones using traditional bulk DNA sequencing methods.”                   PubMed Central (PMC)              Novel Scheme for Defining the Clinical Implications of TP53 Mutations in...    TP53 mutations (TP53MT) occur in diverse genomic configurations. Particularly, biallelic inactivation is associated with poor overall survival in cancer. Lesions affecting only one allele might not be directly leukemogenic, questioning the presence...

Faron Pharmaceuticals

Faron Pharmaceuticals is a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company whose three drug candidates relate to the modulation of immune system or inflammatory response. Faron is a very high-risk ...

<p>Faron Pharmaceuticals is a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company whose three drug candidates relate to the modulation of immune system or inflammatory response. Faron is a very high-risk investment as drug development requires frontloaded investments in research, while the success of commercialization is very uncertain. If the drug candidates enter the market, the invested capital can be multiplied. However, failure of drug development is frequent and, in that case, the invested capital may be partially or totally lost. We believe the share provides sufficient expected return to counterbalance the high risk. The share is suitable for a long-term investor that tolerates high risk as part of a well-diversified portfolio. A person investing in Faron must also be prepared for share issues.</p> 

	2021	22e	23e
Revenue	0.0	0.0	0.0
growth-%
EBIT (adj.)	-21.1	-22.0	-0.8
EBIT-% (adj.)	-527,700.0 %	-550,000.0 %	-19,500.0 %
EPS (adj.)	-0.40	-0.40	-0.02
Dividend	0.00	0.00	0.00
Dividend %
P/E (adj.)	neg.	neg.	neg.
EV/EBITDA	neg.	neg.	neg.

Risky investment with huge potential

Login required

Key Estimate Figures08.08.2022

Forum discussions