Guy

Putting this out here to keep score. A list of Q2 catalysts I'm bullish on: $ABVX UC maintenance $NKTR AA extension $PRAX P3 POWER1 data $CGEM CLN-978 initial data in SLE (if meh will shift to $IMVT) $GRCE PDUFA Apr. 23rd $CYTK nHCM (in calls only) $AVTX HS (highly binary, +300%/-90%) $TNGX Vopimetostat ph1/2 lung cancer data (guided for 2026, but data should be out this Q based on my estimates). $NVO earnings May 6th (not your typical catalyst but hey) $FULC SCD trial design (hoping for a ph2 pivotal or ph2/3)

@A_May_MD @Archimedes20311 Come on $SYRE made a great pitch for investors.

@Archimedes20311 Were you under the impression that it is possible for that stock to go *down* ever?

Why is $SYRE up? $SNY $TEVA data far more robust

@zohmbastic Happy to! 🫡

@byebyegoodguy ty

$UNH 415 area should be key

@CloisterRes Could it be a flex? Sry trying to cope

Oh lawd

@A_May_MD PR AH then.

🚨$ABVX just quietly dropped new slides again! Aside from showing a much better/clearer discussion of data/expectations and a clear goal to handhold the market with the upcoming part 2 dataset, these slides give us another key insight: $ABVX is finding the same expected background nNMSC/NMSC rates as @deathtouch2k and I have discussed. nNMSC/100PY expected range: 0.3-0.7 ↪️Obe's rate so far: ~0.59 NMSC/100PY expected range: 0.7-1.4 ↪️Obe's rate so far: ~0.79 And those are just for the 50mg doses...the Obe rates get further diluted massively if you were to include the 25mg dose levels, suggesting that the overall population is likely on the low end of expected cancer incidence. (Note the the calculations can change slightly once we get exact numbers of PY of exposure). So, even just looking at the 50mg dosing patient years, and not including the Part 2 data that might further reinforce safety, $ABVX is getting the word out that their EXISTING cancer event rates are ALREADY well within EXPECTATIONS...the market is clearly waiting for the Part 2 data before coming to this conclusion...but I personally don't see why we need to wait. These data are very clear. I continue to see no evidence of a "cancer signal" here, and I find the double digit stock price to be an absolute STEAL. $ABVX would very likely (IMO) have at least temporarily cracked $200/share on their absolutely unprecedented maintenance update without this (bogus?) "cancer scare". Those of us in the weeds have been able to see that the "cancer scare" was noise from the beginning...the company of course will be slower in reaching the market to get that word out and make people understand it, but IMO that's where we are heading. I would predict that stock price will follow!

@zohmbastic That was good! Raised stop on remaining to 1.15

$IWM 295c more trim, 1/4 size left, 296.2-296.3 should be big zone

@zohmbastic let's roll!

$IWM 295c lotto vs lod

@HugoMacdermott I have no idea!

@byebyegoodguy What am I missing?

$CNTX I'm kinda surprised it's still flat-ish pre-market. 29% ORR with 7 (median) prior lines. Notable safety too: 1 single Gr1 CRS event (n = 9). x.com/richtrades100/…

@WassimLaroussi3 What is it? 👀

This reminds me of $SAVA - getting random emails -> $IBRX

@AnotherKoreanX @pawcio2009 1-1

@pawcio2009 Netherlands 2:0 Japan.

Netherlands 🇳🇱 vs Japan 🇯🇵 Should be a good one here 🍿

@anthonystaj @TheBiotechBear wen pitch?

@byebyegoodguy @TheBiotechBear it's nice. but there's better coming

You aren’t rich until you can afford your wife’s lifestyle business that loses money every month

@karpathy Lemme us know your thoughts once you get access and try it out. 😆🫣

This is a super exciting release - Claude Fable 5 is the same underlying model as Mythos but with added safeguards. The benchmarks are great and it's SOTA on everything by a margin but I'll add that *qualitatively* also, this is a major-version-bump-deserving step change forward (imo of the same order as Claude 4.5 was in November), peaking especially for long problem-solving sessions on very difficult problems. You can give it a lot more ambitious tasks than what you're used to, the model "gets it" and it will just go, and it's never felt this tempting to stop looking at the code at all (but don't do this in prod!). The model still has quirks that people will run into and the safeguards are configured to be a little too trigger happy for launch, which can hopefully be tuned over time. I feel a lot of things changing as working software increasingly comes out on a tap. The Jevon's paradox kicks in and I feel my own demand for software growing substantially. You can ask for anything - explainers, visualizers, dashboards, bespoke single-use apps (e.g. a full wandb that is hyper-specific just for your project), you can 10X your test suite, auto-optimize code, run giant research projects with custom HTML for the results, anything! "Free your mind" (Matrix ref). Really looking forward to all the things people build!

Come on you guys ...

@A_May_MD @biopharmacaster The presentation was finished and exported to PDF at 10:25am today, EDT time. That's as far as I could make it.

@biopharmacaster I’m sure some youngins on here could do some internet stuff to see exactly what time the new slides were uploaded. I’m a boomer with that kind of stuff.

$ABVX seems to have (in the last hour or so?) quietly released a new corporate deck with 3 important slides at the end. All, in my opinion, providing strong new information showing that these cancer cases were unrelated to drug and equivalent to expected background noise. Most important is the slide on the 2 non-nonmelanoma skin cancers. BOTH of these were more indolent, low/intermediate subtypes of their respective cancer (prostate and breast). Not only does this mean that the cancers are less threatening, it also means that THEY ARE SLOWER GROWING CANCERS. Why is this particularly important? Because it means that the development of the cancers very (very) likely PREDATES THEIR ENROLLMENT IN THE TRIAL. Look into the doubling times of grade 2 (Gleason 7) prostate cancer and grade 2 NST breast carcinoma. These are slow-growing tumors that very likely existed before these patients ever even had a dose of obefazimod. That relates to another key finding on this slide - the prostate cancer case was identified via PSA screening at 8.5 months into the study (remember earlier is better). In the Guggenheim conference they had said it was confirmed at day 367...they must have been referring to the biopsy confirmation of the subtype, not PSA confirmation of the prostate cancer diagnosis. This new information speaks to an earlier diagnosis. The breast cancer patient was diagnosed even earlier than that! Only 6.8 months of Obe exposure. Also, these new slides give us actual information on the prior drug exposures - before this afternoon we knew that they were on some prior treatments, but we didn't know what...THE PROSTATE CANCER WAS PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ***5*** DRUGS WITH LABELED CANCER WARNINGS BEFORE ENROLLING IN THE STUDY! 3 OF THEM HAD ***BLACK BOX WARNINGS*** FOR CANCER RISK! -Humira (black box) -Infliximab (black box) -Rinvoq (black box) -Entyvio (warnings and precautions) -Stelara (warnings and precautions) We also just got new info on the NMSC cases (which matter far less but which spooked the market anyway). How you can look at the details of these skin cancer cases and think they are related to the drug is beyond me (but then again, these details just got released - quietly, for some reason). First of all, ***ALL OF THE 4 50MG CASES OF NMSC OCCURED IN 6 MONTHS OR LESS!!! Again, too rapid to be reasonably assumed drug-related. The fact that they all happened in the first half of this study is actually extremely exculpating evidence for $ABVX. Other details: -4/5 were 60+ years old (STRONGLY associated with skin cancer risk) -3/5 had PRIOR SKIN CANCER ALREADY(!!!!!) -4/5 had prior exposure to other drugs that are known to increase skin cancer risk. Finally, they also added a slide discussing that some studies have shown the elevated risks of these cancers for UC patients at baseline. -~5x higher risk of prostate cancer in IBD patients -~2x higher risk of breast cancer in IBD patients Why did $ABVX add these 3 slides to the corporate deck randomly, silently, on a Friday afternoon? IDK. Legitimately good news in those slides! I'd have pressed released this info as soon as I had it, because the details really help alleviate the (already statistically misguided) concern that these cancers could've been caused by Obefazimod. Here's the link: ir.abivax.com/static-files/e…

@A_May_MD @charle77238 I legitimately believe he isn't mentally stable. Probably bipolar disorder.

@charle77238 Legitimately, fuck this guy. No idea why X let him do this shit for so long. $NKTR is up almost 600% since the day he posted this shit about showing up at my house over it, BTW.

Lol, fuck this guy $ABVX $NKTR

@A_May_MD Maybe they didn't want to PR it on a Friday. Let's hope for all the safety package early next week.

Wen Chapter 7? $MSTR