09:00 AM EDT = 15:00 Oslo

Takker.

Takker

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00424-4/fulltext

Nå er det uansett så mye negativt rundt BergenBio at om det kommer en negativ melding til så vil ikke kursen kollapse, får håpe på noe positivt men det er vel å drømme :-)

The COVID-19 pandemic has been met by unequal responses in different countries1, 2 and led to unequal impacts, with populations in Europe, the USA, and Latin America disproportionately impacted.3 Science has uncovered much about SARS-CoV-2 and made extraordinary and unprecedented progress on the development of COVID-19 vaccines, but there is still great uncertainty as the pandemic continues to evolve. COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out in many countries, but this does not mean the crisis is close to being resolved. We are simply moving to a new phase of the pandemic.
What emerges next will partly depend on the ongoing evolution of SARS-CoV-2, on the behaviour of citizens, on governments' decisions about how to respond to the pandemic, on progress in vaccine development and treatments and also in a broader range of disciplines in the sciences and humanities that focus both on bringing this pandemic to an end and learning how to reduce the impacts of future zoonoses, and on the extent to which the international community can stand together in its efforts to control COVID-19. Vaccines alone, unless they achieve high population coverage, offer long-lasting protection, and are effective in preventing both SARS-CoV-2 transmission and COVID-19, will not end the pandemic or allow the world to return to “business as usual”. Until high levels of global vaccine-mediated protection are achieved across the world, it could be catastrophic if measures such as mask wearing, physical distancing, and hand hygiene are relaxed prematurely.4 Countries, communities, and individuals must be prepared to cope in the longer-term with both the demands and the consequences of living with such essential containment and prevention measures.
• View related content for this article
Many factors will determine the overall outcome of the pandemic. A nationalistic rather than global approach to vaccine delivery is not only morally wrong but will also delay any return to a level of “normality” (including relaxed border controls) because no country can be safe until all countries are safe. SARS-CoV-2 could continue to mutate in ways that both accelerate virus transmission and reduce vaccine effectiveness.5, 6, 7 Vaccine hesitancy, misinformation, and disinformation could compromise the global COVID-19 response.8 Naive assumptions about herd immunity, given the appearance of new and challenging SARS-CoV-2 variants,5, 9 could seriously risk repeated outbreaks and recurrences. SARS-CoV-2 can probably never be globally eradicated, because of its presence in many animals (including cats and dogs)10 and because of incomplete vaccine coverage and variable degrees of immunological protection.11 Hence, ongoing strategies to deal with the endemic presence of SARS-CoV-2 in populations over the long term will be needed. Furthermore, we do not yet know if, and when, revaccination with current or new COVID-19 vaccines will be required since the duration of immunological protection and the efficacy against emergent SARS-CoV-2 variants remain unknown. With such uncertainties, we should not assume that recent scientific progress on COVID-19 diagnostics, vaccines, and treatments will end the pandemic. The world is likely to have many more years of COVID-19 decision making ahead—there is no quick solution available at present.
The decisions of global agencies and governments, as well as the behaviours of citizens in every society, will greatly affect the journey ahead. There are many possible outcomes. At one extreme is the most optimistic scenario, in which new-generation COVID-19 vaccines are effective against all SARS-CoV-2 variants (including those that may yet emerge) and viral control is pursued effectively in every country in a coordinated effort to achieve global control. Even with international cooperation and adequate funding, this scenario would inevitably take a long time to achieve. The COVAX initiative is just an initial step towards addressing vaccine equity and global coordination for vaccine access, especially for lower income countries.12 At the other extreme is a pessimistic scenario, in which SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge repeatedly with the ability to escape vaccine immunity, so that only high-income countries can respond by rapidly manufacturing adapted vaccines for multiple rounds of population reimmunisation in pursuit of national control while the rest of the world struggles with repeated waves and vaccines that are not sufficiently effective against newly circulating viral variants. In such a scenario, even in high-income countries, there would probably be repeated outbreaks and the path to “normality” in society and business would be much longer. And there are many other intermediate or alternate scenarios.
Countries that have kept SARS-CoV-2 in check and countries where there are high levels of viral transmission will in time all probably reach a similar destination, even though their paths to arrive there will be quite different, because no countries can remain permanently isolated from the rest of the world. Unfortunately, countries working in isolation from each other and from global agencies will prolong the pandemic. A nationalistic rather than a global approach to COVID-19 vaccine availability, distribution, and delivery will make a pessimistic outcome much more likely. Additionally, unless countries work together to scale up prevention efforts, the risk of other pandemics, or other transboundary disasters with similar consequences, including those fuelled by climate change, will remain a constant threat.
The International Science Council (ISC), as the independent, global voice for science in the broadest sense, believes it is crucial that the range of COVID-19 scenarios over the mid-term and long-term is explored to assist our understanding of the options that will make better outcomes more likely. Decisions to be made in the coming months need to be informed not only by short-term priorities, but also by awareness of how those decisions are likely to affect the ultimate destination. Providing such analyses to policy makers and citizens should assist informed decision making.
In developing its COVID-19 Scenarios Project, the ISC has consulted with WHO and the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. The ISC has established in February, 2021, a multidisciplinary Oversight Panel made up of globally representative world experts in relevant disciplines to work with a technical team to produce the scenario map. The Oversight Panel will report within 6–8 months to the global community on the possible COVID-19 scenarios that lie ahead over the next 3–5 years, and on the choices that could be made by governments, agencies, and citizens to provide a pathway to an optimistic outcome for the world.

The authors are members of the Interim COVID-19 Working Group of the ISC. DS is convener of the interim working group. PG is President-Elect of the ISC. GB is a member of the ISC Governing Board. HH is Chief Executive Officer of the ISC. SSAK is Co-chair of the South African Ministerial Advisory Committee on COVID-19. PP has received grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and personal fees as special adviser from the European Commission and as Chair of the Board from the HMG SCOR Board, unrelated to the current project. CW is a member of the working group on pandemics and crisis of the Group of Chief Science Advisors to the European Commission and the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies and has received grants from the German Federal Ministry of Research and Education, the German Federal Ministry for Family and Seniors, the Bertelsmann Foundation, the German Federal Ministry for Health, the German Federal Ministry of Justice and for Consumer Protection, personal fees from Agaplesion gAG as a member of supervisory board, and personal fees from several companies and organisations all unrelated to this Comment. We thank Felicia Low for her help in preparing this Comment.
References

1.Brauner JM Mindermann S Sharma M et al.
Inferring the effectiveness of government interventions against COVID-19.
Science. 2020; (published online Dec 15.)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abd9338
View in Article
Scopus (28)
PubMed
Crossref
Google Scholar
2.Allen K Buklijas T Chen A et al.
Tracking global evidence-to-policy pathways in the coronavirus crisis: a preliminary report.
International Network for Government Science Advice, Auckland2020
https://www.ingsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/INGSA-Evidence-to-Policy-Tracker_Report-1_FINAL_17Sept.pdf
Date accessed: February 15, 2021
View in Article
Google Scholar
3.Roser M Ritchie H Ortiz-Ospina E Hasell J
Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19).
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus
Date: 2020
Date accessed: February 14, 2021
View in Article
Google Scholar
4.Haug N Geyrhofer L Londei A et al.
Ranking the effectiveness of worldwide COVID-19 government interventions.
Nat Human Behav. 2020; 4: 1303-1312
View in Article
Scopus (61)
PubMed
Crossref
Google Scholar
5.Fontanet A Autran B Lina B Kieny MP Abdool Karim SS Sridhar D
SARS-CoV-2 variants and ending the COVID-19 pandemic.
Lancet. 2021; (published online Feb 11.)
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00370-6
View in Article
Scopus (22)
PubMed
Summary
Full Text
Full Text PDF
Google Scholar
6.Chand M Hopkins S Dabrera G et al.
Investigation of novel SARS-CoV-2 variant: variant of concern 202012/01.
Public Health England, London2020
View in Article
Google Scholar
7.Tegally H Wilkinson E Giovanetti M et al.
Emergence and rapid spread of a new severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lineage with multiple spike mutations in South Africa.
MedRxiv. 2020; (published online Dec 22.) (preprint)
https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.21.20248640
View in Article
Google Scholar

Hva Skjer’a.... trangt i heisen ? 🤣💦👍👏👏👏

Dette blir en flott slutt på uka og en end bedre start på mandag...

Gleder meg...

(«Hva Var Det Jeg Sa».... )

Hva er dette? Kan du være snill å forklare hva du mener her.

Sitter du fast i heisen?

Covid studiet fikk p>0,06 for ventilator free survival (VFS) i den dårligste pasient gruppen.
Ventilator Free Survival
• Defined as the proportion of patients that survived to day 29 day without admission to ICU and the need for ventilator assisted breathing
• A sub-group of patients treated with bemcentinib appeared to be protected from an early deterioration

Lurer på hva p hadde blitt om de hadde brukt denne definisjonen (legg merke til sucessful extubation)?

Ventilator-free days (VFD) is defined as being free from invasive mechanical ventilation for at least 48h (successful extubation). If the patient is re-intubated within 48 hours of the extubation it will be treated as zero VFD; if re-intubated after 48 hours, the 48 hours period will be counted as VFD. Patients discharged from the hospital alive before 28 days are considered alive and free from mechanical ventilation at day 28. Non-survivors at day 28 are considered to have zero VFD.

http://rbti.org.br/imagebank/pdf/RBTI-0226-20-en-para-site-16.07.pdf

Selvfølgelig fikk jeg ikke til å logge meg på. Prøvde å opprette konto men det ble bare tull. Regner ed at jeg får "referat fra møte her" dvs. diskusjoner ang. hvor bra eller dårlige nyheter.

Ingen fiasko på ASCO !

BERGENBIO PRESENTS DATA FROM PHASE I/II BEMCENTINIB/ERLOTINIB COMBINATION TRIAL IN NSCLC AT ASCO MEETING

Bergen, Norway, 04 June 2021 – BerGenBio ASA (OSE:BGBIO), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company developing novel, selective AXL kinase inhibitors for severe unmet medical need, today presents end-of-trial data from a Phase I/II study of bemcentinib in combination with erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.

Study Design

Phase I of the study was a dose escalation arm designed to confirm the safety and tolerability of bemcentinib in NSCLC patients as both monotherapy and in combination with erlotinib in patients whose disease had previously progressed on erlotinib alone.

Phase II assessed patients in two groups; those whose disease had progressed on an approved EGFR inhibitor, and those who were responding/stable on erlotinib as a first line treatment. Both groups were treated with bemcentinib and erlotinib to evaluate the safety and activity of the combination, while assessing reversal or prevention of resistance to EGFR inhibition.

Conclusions

Data from the study found that Bemcentinib in combination with erlotinib was well tolerated over extended periods of time, with the longest ongoing patients having been dosed for over 46 months.

The combination led to disease stabilisation and durable tumour responses in a proportion of patients who had previously progressed on EGFR targeted therapy and who were negative for the T790M resistance mutation. In patients who were responding to first line treatment with erlotinib, either stable disease or partial response, the addition of bemcentinib led to further deepening of responses and prolonged the duration of responses beyond 30 months in 4 out of the 13 patients evaluated. At the time of data cut-off, 2 patients are still participating in the study beyond 34 months of treatment. Ongoing patients at the time of study closure, who wish to continue receiving study treatment, will be offered the drug via an expanded access program.

Nice ,går veien med hovedcaset ,go helg

Supert👍

Godfry har ingen klar vei mot mål. Satser opportunistisk mot Covid uten suksess. Absolutt ingenting som medfører noen interesse for å investere i selskapet . Så langt har kursen hatt litt hjelp av støttekjøp. På ett eller annet tidspunkt så blir det vel for dumt også for TM. Selv ser jeg ikke noen kurs som gjør BGBIO interessant. Ikke 23 kroner, ikke 15 kroner, ikke 10 kroner. Ser egentlig ikke noe kurs som gjør aksjen interessant.

Hvor ble det av en av trådens mest trofaste både i troen og kunskap "Yngling ØH" ?

Sluttresultatet etter fase I/II lagt frem i dag og de viser gode resultater. Så står denne kommentaren i FA: Vi mener ytterligere kliniske undersøkelser trengs for å utforske potensialet fullt ut, og ser frem til å diskutere funnene videre med våre kolleger i ASCO, sier BerGenBio-sjefen Richard Godfrey i en kommentar. Og hva mener han så med dette. ER ikke fase II avsluttet likevel eller er det fase III som kommer. Hvis det er det, SÅ SI DET DA. Dette skaper jo bare usikkerhet

Det finnes tid for alt

Det finnes tid for dot.com, og for crypto, og for evergreen

Det finnes også tid for BGBIO

Det er tid for BGBIO nå

https://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/coronapiller-testes-i-norge/73864270

Satte whiskyen litt i halsen her nå, men det var dessverre Baricitinib som skulle testes.. Er det ikke her BerGenBio burde tatt føringen?

Carrera
Bruk tiden din på det du mener er relevant. Føler du at det er det du gjør nå så sliter du i markedet. En CEO som latterliggjør hele norges biotec industri har interesse for alle som vil norsk biotech industri det beste.

Jepp, men det er litt enklere å teste allerede godkjente legemidler :-)

Det er sant. Men de kunne jo latt vær å bruke et legemiddel med nesten samme navn for så å skrive om det så sent på en fredagskveld midt i whiskyflasketømmingen. 😆

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2031994

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210415005258/en/Merck-and-Ridgeback-Biotherapeutics-Provide-Update-on-Progress-of-Clinical-Development-Program-for-Molnupiravir-an-Investigational-Oral-Therapeutic-for-the-Treatment-of-Mild-to-Moderate-COVID-19

Som åpenbart legman, både Barcitinib og Molnupiravir virker for meg å ha veldig gode resultater🙏
Men utelukker ikke at Bemcentenib kan virke bedre eller komplementært på de sykehusinnlagte med høy crp i ordinal scale 4 og 5.
God helg ! :)