Forum Topics ARX ARX SM Meeting

Pinned straw:

Added 6 months ago

@Strawman my question for the $ARX meeting is a bit more complex than usual, so I thought I'd post it here rather than on Slido.

[Sadly I can't make the meeting today, as I have 6 days work this week and next on my side hustle. :-( ]

Anyway, this morning a LinkedIn post by David Williams congratulating the team at $AVH on the FDA approval of ReCell-GO and stating "... looking forward to seeing more of you product on top of ours ..." or words to that effect go me thinking. When we consider the repsective investment propositions of $IART, $ARX, $AVH and $PNV etc etc. and when we compare metrics, it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking of them as competitors. Sometimes they are, but often they aren't as DW's post exemplifies.

So, I'd find it super helpful if Brian Ward could take a step back and go through each of the main products in the $ARX commercial and development portfolios and simply explain:

  • What the product is and how it works
  • What are the main indications to which it is being targeted
  • In those indications in the US, what is the current Standard of Care
  • What is the main advantage of the $ARX product vs. the SoC (and the evidence to support this)


To lay my cards on the table, I am a former holder of $ARX and a few years ago sold my holding and put it into $PNV, simply because I could never develop a super-clear answer to these questions, as well as that the %GM, Revenue growth, and exploding breadth of applications for $PNV's BTM lead me to decide to back that horse and go "all in".

I don't know if its possible to do that, or if other StrawPeople would like that understanding as well, but it would be wonderful in this rare, long-format interview to get beyond the one slide, general high level summary.

Hope the meeting goes well, and I look forward to catch up with the recording in any event.

lyndonator
Added 6 months ago

@mikebrisy not sure if you saw this in Avita's latest presentation. It helped me, somewhat, in understanding the difference between some of the products.


I'm not sure exactly where Aroa's products fit - but thought it might help:b9a6437828908b456a19bbce7521b0e026a6b2.png

cb79232bfc99b3f60cf22b4de9d7c9ae17e244.png

9

mikebrisy
Added 6 months ago

Thanks @lyndonator. I think $ARX products are targeted on the lower two layers.

6
GazD
Added 6 months ago

Yes my question for Aroa is along similar lines but primarily how do outcomes compare between Aroa and its competitors

8

Strawman
Added 6 months ago

oh sorry @mikebrisy -- I only saw your post now. I did put what you had in Slido to Brian, but not sure he went into the detail you might have liked.

I put this to him at around the 22 minute mark.

Based on the transcript, Brian said the following:

Myriad:

- Used for soft tissue reconstruction, focused on lower limb reconstruction from diabetic foot ulcers, venous ulcers, and limb salvage procedures.

- Competes against placental tissue and animal-based xenografts. 

- Advantages: faster tissue formation, fewer complications, less frequent applications compared to standard of care.

- Also used in trauma cases like vehicle accidents, gunshot wounds, stabbings with large tissue loss (24:00). Advantages over negative pressure wound therapy alone.

Symphony: 

- For diabetic and venous ulcers in the rapid healing stage. Combines Aroa ECM and hyaluronic acid.

- Currently running a randomized controlled trial vs standard of care, with interim results expected end of this year.

OviTex (via partner TELA Bio):

- Used in complex ventral hernia repair, often with infected or complicated cases.

- Prospective studies show very low complication rates (<3%) compared to 10-30% typically seen with standard of care.

OviTex PRS (via TELA Bio): 

- For breast reconstruction post-mastectomy. 

- Rapidly develops into new tissue to support reconstructive procedures.

In summary, the key advantages across Aroa's products compared to standard of care are faster tissue formation and healing, lower complication rates, and fewer applications required. Clinical evidence is being built to support these claims.


I'll post a full summary as a separate Straw.

13

mikebrisy
Added 6 months ago

@Strawman thanks Andrew. He gave a pretty good response, which I haven’t heard him give so comprehensively before.

Just listened to the presentation and probably will need to go back over it in future.

I think a major difference between $ARX and $PNV is that the former’s starting point is more complex wounds, where they have started with multiple products targeting different indications, whereas $PNV started in burns and have been progressively migrating into more complex wounds, driven by the surgeons, but with essentially a single product (not much difference between BTM and MTX).

One thing I can’t reconcile between what David says and what Brian says, is that Brian says synthetics tend not to be used on complex wounds like venous leg ulcers and limb trauma, whereas DW has said they are getting into that (and has circulated journal papers.) I reconcile the statements by observing that both have a low market share in these areas and that are probably both being truthful from their perspectives. The competition and comparative advantages won’t become clear until either 1) we see some properly designed head-to-head trials and/or 2) volumes grow to the point that the competitive dynamic becomes more apparent.

On valuation, while $ARX is cheaper on some multiples for FY24, it’s significantly lower revenue growth makes it harder to project forward with any confidence. But if what Brian has said is true (multiple elements coming together) then you’d expect to see revenue growth at least be maintained, if not accelerate.

So, while I can’t see the case to invest today, it remains one to keep a close eye on.

Disc. Not held. $PNV held in RL and SM

12
GazD
Added 6 months ago

Yes my question for Aroa is along similar lines but primarily how do outcomes compare between Aroa and its competitors

8

NewbieHK
Added 6 months ago

Cash balance down from 44m to 29m and expenses up 31% from 45m to 59m. Revenue expected to grow from 69m to 80-87m.

Mmm - I like the presentation but I just can’t see how they are going to be cash flow positive or profitable anytime soon. One needs to see those expenses stabilise but they are now investing into increasing production from 150 to 200m.

Normalised for this and normalised for that. I guess if we all normalised for this and that no one would have a home loan debt.

https://data-api.marketindex.com.au/api/v1/announcements/XASX:ARX:2A1524278/pdf/inline/fy24-appendix-4e-and-full-year-results?_gl=1*aw8njb*_ga*MTc1NDk2MjEyNy4xNzE3NDcyOTQ1*_ga_R504V9JPBH*MTcxNzQ3Mjk0NS4xLjEuMTcxNzUwMTMyNy40My4wLjA.


8