2026 Q2 - tulosraportti
47 päivää sitten
‧51 min
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | - | - | ||
| 743 | - | - | ||
| 535 | - | - | ||
| 1 332 | - | - | ||
| 2 212 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastot ja ETF:t, joilla on osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q4 - tulosraportti 15.4.2027 |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti 1.9. | ||
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 - tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 - tulosraportti 29.8.2024 |
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
·4 t sittenCircVec and cardiac therapy – what is documented, and what does Circio need to prove? (Part 1/2) I have reviewed Circio's ASGCT data, webcast presentations and interviews, and compared with clinical AAV gene therapy. The first part concerns Circio's own data. Everything below is from preclinical experiments, not human treatment. 1. What do the mouse experiments show? AAV9-circVec 3.2 versus Circio's own mVec cassette, with the same heart-specific cTnT promoter and Firefly luciferase as a reporter. After intravenous dose of 5×10¹² vg/kg: - Up to 40× higher light signal in live mice, followed to day 71, and approximately 35× from isolated hearts. - RNAscope: 34–58× more reporter RNA in positive cells, and around 80 % of examined cardiomyocytes were RNA-positive. - RT-qPCR: approx. 96× more RNA in heart tissue, without statistically significant difference in the number of AAV vector copies. The ASGCT abstract also mentions up to 200× RNA in another analysis. This is not the same metric as 96× from the RT-qPCR figure, and should not be confused. The various measurement methods support increased expression after delivery, but some groups had only four mice. None of these numbers show better heart function. 2. Dose advantage – what does at least 10× mean? A separate mouse experiment investigated 5×10¹² to 1×10¹⁴ vg/kg. The dose curves indicated potential for comparable reporter expression at at least ten times lower AAV dose with circVec than mVec. This applies to measured gene expression in mice, not documented ten times lower dose to treat Danon or arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. PKP2 in the dose figure is an illustrative therapeutic reference level, not documented treatment effect from PKP2. 3. LAMP2B – an important step In September, Circio showed Western blot from mouse hearts on day 57. CircVec 3.2 gave clearly stronger LAMP2B bands than mVec. LAMP2B is relevant in Danon disease, but a precise fold improvement for this protein was not stated. The experiment also does not show correct localization, restored autophagy or improved function in a diseased heart. Danon is also not confirmed as the final clinical indication for Circio. 4. Liver and possible stress response CircVec gave lower unwanted reporter expression in the liver. But lower protein expression in the liver does not necessarily mean fewer AAV particles ended up there. An analysis of UPR-related genes as a group showed lower activation in circVec-treated mouse hearts than with mVec (p=0,003). This is an interesting early signal, not documented reduced immune risk or toxicity in humans. 5. CircVec 5.0 Circio has shown separate design improvements of around 90× and 170× expression versus mVec. These will be combined in Gen 5. In the BioHub interview, Erik Wiklund mentioned over 200× in vivo, while the written presentation describes the combined Gen 5 effect as potential. We need concrete combination data with a therapeutic gene before this can be considered confirmed. 200× expression does not mean 200× lower required treatment dose anyway. Sources part 1: Circio ASGCT poster: https://storage.mfn.se/21fac811-bd25-419d-ab49-20c47ecc5bfb/2026-asgct-poster.pdf Circio ASGCT presentation: https://storage.mfn.se/07a337af-de2b-49c6-ac87-670fbd9d1da4/260515-asgct-circio.pdf Webcast presentation 1.9.2026: https://www.circio.com/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/06/260901-1h26-webcast-circio.pdf The BioHub: https://youtu.be/zrpuXDmCyWc
Dear Hulten :-) Thank you for your really good writings and shares here on the forum, may I not invite you to our facebook group and participate in the debate there too :-) May I perhaps share it in the group on facebook ? https://www.facebook.com/groups/772926445645299 Hoping we see you there :-)
·14 t sittenTomorrow is a red day 😁
- ·17 t sittenCircVec in gene therapy for the eye – what do the mouse experiments show, and where can the technology provide an advantage? I have compared Circios eye data with clinical results from Opus Genetics and 4DMT. The question is not just how much circVec increases gene expression, but whether the technology can provide the same or better therapeutic effect at a lower AAV dose. 1. Circios eye data – mice only CircVec 4.0 was delivered with AAV2 by intravitreal injection in mice. - Up to 50 times higher reporter expression than Circios own mRNA-based control cassette (mVec). - Low-dose circVec (5 × 10⁸ vg/eye) gave up to 12 times higher signal than mVec at ten times higher dose (5 × 10⁹ vg/eye). - Expression was followed until day 63. This applies to a reporter in mice, not visual improvement or therapeutic effect. Differences in eye size, capsids and administration mean the doses cannot be compared directly with clinical studies. 2. Opus Genetics – LCA5 and BEST1 OPGx-LCA5 (AAV8): Six patients received the lowest planned dose, 1 × 10¹⁰ vg/eye. Three adults have maintained improvements in visual function through 24 months, and three adolescents have shown promising results through six months. Opus is proceeding with this dose in phase 3 without further dose escalation. Dosing start is expected in Q4 2026. Here, a dose problem that circVec would necessarily solve has not been documented. OPGx-BEST1 is interesting because Best disease is among the eye indications Circio has previously highlighted, along with wet AMD and retinitis pigmentosa. Five individuals received a low dose in Opus' BEST1 study. Of four who could complete retinal sensitivity examination, three showed improvement in a restricted area. Follow-up was three to six months. The high-dose group with 11 participants has been fully recruited. The results do not yet document that a higher dose gives a better effect. Circio has not publicly documented its own BEST1 candidate. 3. 4DMT – wet AMD 4D-150 is injected into the vitreous body and uses a specially developed AAV capsid (R100). The treatment produces both aflibercept and an RNA-based inhibitor of VEGF-C. In the PRISM phase 2b, 45 patients received either 1 × 10¹⁰ or 3 × 10¹⁰ vg/eye. The higher dose was chosen for phase 3. The company reported a sustained dose response in favor of this dose through two years. For the entire phase 2b group, meaning both doses combined, 4DMT reported a 78 % lower treatment burden: an average of 2.7 supplemental injections compared to 12.0 in a calculated standard course with aflibercept. This was not a concurrent randomized control group. Mild and transient intraocular inflammation was reported in 2 of 71 patients (2.8 %) in combined phase 1/2a and 2b data at the chosen phase 3 dose. This does not rule out rare or late side effects. Could circVec have provided sufficient protein production with fewer AAV particles? Possibly, but it has not been tested with 4D-150. Nor is it given that circVec can easily replace the cassette in a system with multiple treatment mechanisms. 4. CircVec 5.0 – possible further advantage Circio has shown separate design improvements and mentions a potential for over 200 times higher gene expression than a conventional control. The best elements are to be combined in circVec 5.0. It is not documented that the finished combination gives such an effect in the eye. Furthermore, 200 times higher expression does not mean 200 times lower therapeutic dose. Gen 5 can therefore provide further opportunities, but this must be investigated with relevant genes and eye cells. 5. Different diseases require different solutions In LCA5, a functioning gene must reach the photoreceptors. In BEST1, the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) is central. Different BEST1 mutations may also require different treatment strategies. More protein in the wrong cell is not necessarily useful. In wet AMD, certain cells can produce and secrete a VEGF-inhibiting protein that acts locally. This can make increased gene expression interesting, but the protein amount must be safe and properly regulated. 6. What remains for Circio? CTO Thomas Hansen has discussed eye-specific AAV capsids, mapping of which cell types express circVec, and therapeutic constructs against wet AMD. Larger animal models are also on the milestone list. This is important because circVec can increase expression after the construct is delivered, but does not automatically solve the problem of reaching the correct cells. The central task will therefore be to test circVec against a relevant control with the same capsid and therapeutic gene, and investigate dose, therapeutic effect, and safety. My assessment CircVec 4.0 has shown a clear expression advantage in mouse eyes. Opus shows that conventional AAV can work well at a low dose in one disease, while 4DMT shows that dose and effective delivery can still be important in other programs. CircVec's greatest possible advantage perhaps lies where insufficient protein expression or high dose demand limits treatment. The decisive factor will be to show functional therapeutic protein in the correct cells and the same or better treatment effect at a lower AAV dose. Gen 5 is currently a possible extra advantage Kilder mld
·1 päivä sittenNow I have heard absolutely nothing about this, but are there any plans for Circio to be re-registered to e.g. Nasdaq? Given the conditions that the Norwegian stock exchange offers, this could actually be nice.Do not think it will be useless. Now I don't know very much about the Norwegian stock exchange rules, but with the examples of completed course manipulation that I regularly see here, and which apparently just get to pass, a re-registration to e.g. Nasdaq would probably be preferable. Naturally, one would have a different view, should one prefer the current state of things.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti
47 päivää sitten
‧51 min
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·4 t sittenCircVec and cardiac therapy – what is documented, and what does Circio need to prove? (Part 1/2) I have reviewed Circio's ASGCT data, webcast presentations and interviews, and compared with clinical AAV gene therapy. The first part concerns Circio's own data. Everything below is from preclinical experiments, not human treatment. 1. What do the mouse experiments show? AAV9-circVec 3.2 versus Circio's own mVec cassette, with the same heart-specific cTnT promoter and Firefly luciferase as a reporter. After intravenous dose of 5×10¹² vg/kg: - Up to 40× higher light signal in live mice, followed to day 71, and approximately 35× from isolated hearts. - RNAscope: 34–58× more reporter RNA in positive cells, and around 80 % of examined cardiomyocytes were RNA-positive. - RT-qPCR: approx. 96× more RNA in heart tissue, without statistically significant difference in the number of AAV vector copies. The ASGCT abstract also mentions up to 200× RNA in another analysis. This is not the same metric as 96× from the RT-qPCR figure, and should not be confused. The various measurement methods support increased expression after delivery, but some groups had only four mice. None of these numbers show better heart function. 2. Dose advantage – what does at least 10× mean? A separate mouse experiment investigated 5×10¹² to 1×10¹⁴ vg/kg. The dose curves indicated potential for comparable reporter expression at at least ten times lower AAV dose with circVec than mVec. This applies to measured gene expression in mice, not documented ten times lower dose to treat Danon or arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. PKP2 in the dose figure is an illustrative therapeutic reference level, not documented treatment effect from PKP2. 3. LAMP2B – an important step In September, Circio showed Western blot from mouse hearts on day 57. CircVec 3.2 gave clearly stronger LAMP2B bands than mVec. LAMP2B is relevant in Danon disease, but a precise fold improvement for this protein was not stated. The experiment also does not show correct localization, restored autophagy or improved function in a diseased heart. Danon is also not confirmed as the final clinical indication for Circio. 4. Liver and possible stress response CircVec gave lower unwanted reporter expression in the liver. But lower protein expression in the liver does not necessarily mean fewer AAV particles ended up there. An analysis of UPR-related genes as a group showed lower activation in circVec-treated mouse hearts than with mVec (p=0,003). This is an interesting early signal, not documented reduced immune risk or toxicity in humans. 5. CircVec 5.0 Circio has shown separate design improvements of around 90× and 170× expression versus mVec. These will be combined in Gen 5. In the BioHub interview, Erik Wiklund mentioned over 200× in vivo, while the written presentation describes the combined Gen 5 effect as potential. We need concrete combination data with a therapeutic gene before this can be considered confirmed. 200× expression does not mean 200× lower required treatment dose anyway. Sources part 1: Circio ASGCT poster: https://storage.mfn.se/21fac811-bd25-419d-ab49-20c47ecc5bfb/2026-asgct-poster.pdf Circio ASGCT presentation: https://storage.mfn.se/07a337af-de2b-49c6-ac87-670fbd9d1da4/260515-asgct-circio.pdf Webcast presentation 1.9.2026: https://www.circio.com/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/06/260901-1h26-webcast-circio.pdf The BioHub: https://youtu.be/zrpuXDmCyWcDear Hulten :-) Thank you for your really good writings and shares here on the forum, may I not invite you to our facebook group and participate in the debate there too :-) May I perhaps share it in the group on facebook ? https://www.facebook.com/groups/772926445645299 Hoping we see you there :-)
- ·14 t sittenTomorrow is a red day 😁
- ·17 t sittenCircVec in gene therapy for the eye – what do the mouse experiments show, and where can the technology provide an advantage? I have compared Circios eye data with clinical results from Opus Genetics and 4DMT. The question is not just how much circVec increases gene expression, but whether the technology can provide the same or better therapeutic effect at a lower AAV dose. 1. Circios eye data – mice only CircVec 4.0 was delivered with AAV2 by intravitreal injection in mice. - Up to 50 times higher reporter expression than Circios own mRNA-based control cassette (mVec). - Low-dose circVec (5 × 10⁸ vg/eye) gave up to 12 times higher signal than mVec at ten times higher dose (5 × 10⁹ vg/eye). - Expression was followed until day 63. This applies to a reporter in mice, not visual improvement or therapeutic effect. Differences in eye size, capsids and administration mean the doses cannot be compared directly with clinical studies. 2. Opus Genetics – LCA5 and BEST1 OPGx-LCA5 (AAV8): Six patients received the lowest planned dose, 1 × 10¹⁰ vg/eye. Three adults have maintained improvements in visual function through 24 months, and three adolescents have shown promising results through six months. Opus is proceeding with this dose in phase 3 without further dose escalation. Dosing start is expected in Q4 2026. Here, a dose problem that circVec would necessarily solve has not been documented. OPGx-BEST1 is interesting because Best disease is among the eye indications Circio has previously highlighted, along with wet AMD and retinitis pigmentosa. Five individuals received a low dose in Opus' BEST1 study. Of four who could complete retinal sensitivity examination, three showed improvement in a restricted area. Follow-up was three to six months. The high-dose group with 11 participants has been fully recruited. The results do not yet document that a higher dose gives a better effect. Circio has not publicly documented its own BEST1 candidate. 3. 4DMT – wet AMD 4D-150 is injected into the vitreous body and uses a specially developed AAV capsid (R100). The treatment produces both aflibercept and an RNA-based inhibitor of VEGF-C. In the PRISM phase 2b, 45 patients received either 1 × 10¹⁰ or 3 × 10¹⁰ vg/eye. The higher dose was chosen for phase 3. The company reported a sustained dose response in favor of this dose through two years. For the entire phase 2b group, meaning both doses combined, 4DMT reported a 78 % lower treatment burden: an average of 2.7 supplemental injections compared to 12.0 in a calculated standard course with aflibercept. This was not a concurrent randomized control group. Mild and transient intraocular inflammation was reported in 2 of 71 patients (2.8 %) in combined phase 1/2a and 2b data at the chosen phase 3 dose. This does not rule out rare or late side effects. Could circVec have provided sufficient protein production with fewer AAV particles? Possibly, but it has not been tested with 4D-150. Nor is it given that circVec can easily replace the cassette in a system with multiple treatment mechanisms. 4. CircVec 5.0 – possible further advantage Circio has shown separate design improvements and mentions a potential for over 200 times higher gene expression than a conventional control. The best elements are to be combined in circVec 5.0. It is not documented that the finished combination gives such an effect in the eye. Furthermore, 200 times higher expression does not mean 200 times lower therapeutic dose. Gen 5 can therefore provide further opportunities, but this must be investigated with relevant genes and eye cells. 5. Different diseases require different solutions In LCA5, a functioning gene must reach the photoreceptors. In BEST1, the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) is central. Different BEST1 mutations may also require different treatment strategies. More protein in the wrong cell is not necessarily useful. In wet AMD, certain cells can produce and secrete a VEGF-inhibiting protein that acts locally. This can make increased gene expression interesting, but the protein amount must be safe and properly regulated. 6. What remains for Circio? CTO Thomas Hansen has discussed eye-specific AAV capsids, mapping of which cell types express circVec, and therapeutic constructs against wet AMD. Larger animal models are also on the milestone list. This is important because circVec can increase expression after the construct is delivered, but does not automatically solve the problem of reaching the correct cells. The central task will therefore be to test circVec against a relevant control with the same capsid and therapeutic gene, and investigate dose, therapeutic effect, and safety. My assessment CircVec 4.0 has shown a clear expression advantage in mouse eyes. Opus shows that conventional AAV can work well at a low dose in one disease, while 4DMT shows that dose and effective delivery can still be important in other programs. CircVec's greatest possible advantage perhaps lies where insufficient protein expression or high dose demand limits treatment. The decisive factor will be to show functional therapeutic protein in the correct cells and the same or better treatment effect at a lower AAV dose. Gen 5 is currently a possible extra advantage Kilder mld
- ·1 päivä sittenNow I have heard absolutely nothing about this, but are there any plans for Circio to be re-registered to e.g. Nasdaq? Given the conditions that the Norwegian stock exchange offers, this could actually be nice.Do not think it will be useless. Now I don't know very much about the Norwegian stock exchange rules, but with the examples of completed course manipulation that I regularly see here, and which apparently just get to pass, a re-registration to e.g. Nasdaq would probably be preferable. Naturally, one would have a different view, should one prefer the current state of things.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | - | - | ||
| 743 | - | - | ||
| 535 | - | - | ||
| 1 332 | - | - | ||
| 2 212 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastot ja ETF:t, joilla on osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q4 - tulosraportti 15.4.2027 |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti 1.9. | ||
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 - tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 - tulosraportti 29.8.2024 |
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti
47 päivää sitten
‧51 min
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q4 - tulosraportti 15.4.2027 |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti 1.9. | ||
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 - tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 - tulosraportti 29.8.2024 |
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·4 t sittenCircVec and cardiac therapy – what is documented, and what does Circio need to prove? (Part 1/2) I have reviewed Circio's ASGCT data, webcast presentations and interviews, and compared with clinical AAV gene therapy. The first part concerns Circio's own data. Everything below is from preclinical experiments, not human treatment. 1. What do the mouse experiments show? AAV9-circVec 3.2 versus Circio's own mVec cassette, with the same heart-specific cTnT promoter and Firefly luciferase as a reporter. After intravenous dose of 5×10¹² vg/kg: - Up to 40× higher light signal in live mice, followed to day 71, and approximately 35× from isolated hearts. - RNAscope: 34–58× more reporter RNA in positive cells, and around 80 % of examined cardiomyocytes were RNA-positive. - RT-qPCR: approx. 96× more RNA in heart tissue, without statistically significant difference in the number of AAV vector copies. The ASGCT abstract also mentions up to 200× RNA in another analysis. This is not the same metric as 96× from the RT-qPCR figure, and should not be confused. The various measurement methods support increased expression after delivery, but some groups had only four mice. None of these numbers show better heart function. 2. Dose advantage – what does at least 10× mean? A separate mouse experiment investigated 5×10¹² to 1×10¹⁴ vg/kg. The dose curves indicated potential for comparable reporter expression at at least ten times lower AAV dose with circVec than mVec. This applies to measured gene expression in mice, not documented ten times lower dose to treat Danon or arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. PKP2 in the dose figure is an illustrative therapeutic reference level, not documented treatment effect from PKP2. 3. LAMP2B – an important step In September, Circio showed Western blot from mouse hearts on day 57. CircVec 3.2 gave clearly stronger LAMP2B bands than mVec. LAMP2B is relevant in Danon disease, but a precise fold improvement for this protein was not stated. The experiment also does not show correct localization, restored autophagy or improved function in a diseased heart. Danon is also not confirmed as the final clinical indication for Circio. 4. Liver and possible stress response CircVec gave lower unwanted reporter expression in the liver. But lower protein expression in the liver does not necessarily mean fewer AAV particles ended up there. An analysis of UPR-related genes as a group showed lower activation in circVec-treated mouse hearts than with mVec (p=0,003). This is an interesting early signal, not documented reduced immune risk or toxicity in humans. 5. CircVec 5.0 Circio has shown separate design improvements of around 90× and 170× expression versus mVec. These will be combined in Gen 5. In the BioHub interview, Erik Wiklund mentioned over 200× in vivo, while the written presentation describes the combined Gen 5 effect as potential. We need concrete combination data with a therapeutic gene before this can be considered confirmed. 200× expression does not mean 200× lower required treatment dose anyway. Sources part 1: Circio ASGCT poster: https://storage.mfn.se/21fac811-bd25-419d-ab49-20c47ecc5bfb/2026-asgct-poster.pdf Circio ASGCT presentation: https://storage.mfn.se/07a337af-de2b-49c6-ac87-670fbd9d1da4/260515-asgct-circio.pdf Webcast presentation 1.9.2026: https://www.circio.com/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/06/260901-1h26-webcast-circio.pdf The BioHub: https://youtu.be/zrpuXDmCyWcDear Hulten :-) Thank you for your really good writings and shares here on the forum, may I not invite you to our facebook group and participate in the debate there too :-) May I perhaps share it in the group on facebook ? https://www.facebook.com/groups/772926445645299 Hoping we see you there :-)
- ·14 t sittenTomorrow is a red day 😁
- ·17 t sittenCircVec in gene therapy for the eye – what do the mouse experiments show, and where can the technology provide an advantage? I have compared Circios eye data with clinical results from Opus Genetics and 4DMT. The question is not just how much circVec increases gene expression, but whether the technology can provide the same or better therapeutic effect at a lower AAV dose. 1. Circios eye data – mice only CircVec 4.0 was delivered with AAV2 by intravitreal injection in mice. - Up to 50 times higher reporter expression than Circios own mRNA-based control cassette (mVec). - Low-dose circVec (5 × 10⁸ vg/eye) gave up to 12 times higher signal than mVec at ten times higher dose (5 × 10⁹ vg/eye). - Expression was followed until day 63. This applies to a reporter in mice, not visual improvement or therapeutic effect. Differences in eye size, capsids and administration mean the doses cannot be compared directly with clinical studies. 2. Opus Genetics – LCA5 and BEST1 OPGx-LCA5 (AAV8): Six patients received the lowest planned dose, 1 × 10¹⁰ vg/eye. Three adults have maintained improvements in visual function through 24 months, and three adolescents have shown promising results through six months. Opus is proceeding with this dose in phase 3 without further dose escalation. Dosing start is expected in Q4 2026. Here, a dose problem that circVec would necessarily solve has not been documented. OPGx-BEST1 is interesting because Best disease is among the eye indications Circio has previously highlighted, along with wet AMD and retinitis pigmentosa. Five individuals received a low dose in Opus' BEST1 study. Of four who could complete retinal sensitivity examination, three showed improvement in a restricted area. Follow-up was three to six months. The high-dose group with 11 participants has been fully recruited. The results do not yet document that a higher dose gives a better effect. Circio has not publicly documented its own BEST1 candidate. 3. 4DMT – wet AMD 4D-150 is injected into the vitreous body and uses a specially developed AAV capsid (R100). The treatment produces both aflibercept and an RNA-based inhibitor of VEGF-C. In the PRISM phase 2b, 45 patients received either 1 × 10¹⁰ or 3 × 10¹⁰ vg/eye. The higher dose was chosen for phase 3. The company reported a sustained dose response in favor of this dose through two years. For the entire phase 2b group, meaning both doses combined, 4DMT reported a 78 % lower treatment burden: an average of 2.7 supplemental injections compared to 12.0 in a calculated standard course with aflibercept. This was not a concurrent randomized control group. Mild and transient intraocular inflammation was reported in 2 of 71 patients (2.8 %) in combined phase 1/2a and 2b data at the chosen phase 3 dose. This does not rule out rare or late side effects. Could circVec have provided sufficient protein production with fewer AAV particles? Possibly, but it has not been tested with 4D-150. Nor is it given that circVec can easily replace the cassette in a system with multiple treatment mechanisms. 4. CircVec 5.0 – possible further advantage Circio has shown separate design improvements and mentions a potential for over 200 times higher gene expression than a conventional control. The best elements are to be combined in circVec 5.0. It is not documented that the finished combination gives such an effect in the eye. Furthermore, 200 times higher expression does not mean 200 times lower therapeutic dose. Gen 5 can therefore provide further opportunities, but this must be investigated with relevant genes and eye cells. 5. Different diseases require different solutions In LCA5, a functioning gene must reach the photoreceptors. In BEST1, the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) is central. Different BEST1 mutations may also require different treatment strategies. More protein in the wrong cell is not necessarily useful. In wet AMD, certain cells can produce and secrete a VEGF-inhibiting protein that acts locally. This can make increased gene expression interesting, but the protein amount must be safe and properly regulated. 6. What remains for Circio? CTO Thomas Hansen has discussed eye-specific AAV capsids, mapping of which cell types express circVec, and therapeutic constructs against wet AMD. Larger animal models are also on the milestone list. This is important because circVec can increase expression after the construct is delivered, but does not automatically solve the problem of reaching the correct cells. The central task will therefore be to test circVec against a relevant control with the same capsid and therapeutic gene, and investigate dose, therapeutic effect, and safety. My assessment CircVec 4.0 has shown a clear expression advantage in mouse eyes. Opus shows that conventional AAV can work well at a low dose in one disease, while 4DMT shows that dose and effective delivery can still be important in other programs. CircVec's greatest possible advantage perhaps lies where insufficient protein expression or high dose demand limits treatment. The decisive factor will be to show functional therapeutic protein in the correct cells and the same or better treatment effect at a lower AAV dose. Gen 5 is currently a possible extra advantage Kilder mld
- ·1 päivä sittenNow I have heard absolutely nothing about this, but are there any plans for Circio to be re-registered to e.g. Nasdaq? Given the conditions that the Norwegian stock exchange offers, this could actually be nice.Do not think it will be useless. Now I don't know very much about the Norwegian stock exchange rules, but with the examples of completed course manipulation that I regularly see here, and which apparently just get to pass, a re-registration to e.g. Nasdaq would probably be preferable. Naturally, one would have a different view, should one prefer the current state of things.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | - | - | ||
| 743 | - | - | ||
| 535 | - | - | ||
| 1 332 | - | - | ||
| 2 212 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastot ja ETF:t, joilla on osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt