I read that also. Couple of thoughts immediately come to mind ignoring the issue of stability of such a neutron poor nuclide for the moment. First regarding the experiment itself, at the abundance ratios relative to Thorium they are talking about(~10-11), are the experiments even sensitive enough to distinguish actual results from background. Second, I have no clue what mechanism would allow the creation of a nuclide in that region of the nuclear chart. The standard processes associated with stellar and supernovae nucleosynthesis are obviously out (i.e. p-, r-process).
As far as the stability issue. Obviously we would not be talking about a nucleus in its ground state. 294118, as tentatively assigned, has a half lile of 890 microseconds. Some of the same authors in this study have repeatedly suggested the presence of super- and hyperdeformed nuclear states, generally very neutron deficient, that experience significant extra stability. Their claims incude unusual alpha decays from neutron deficient acitinides, such as 236Bk, as well as Rg in Au samples and very neutron deficient istopes of Th itself. There was also a claim back in the 1970's of the creation of a very neutron deficient isotope of element 112 of mass ~272, which was not deemed to be suffficent by IUPAC.
None of these claims seem do not seem to have be verified by any other researchers. With the exception of the element 112 claim, I have not read about attempts to replicate the studies either. There is a lot of stuff out there about superdeformation, but I see nothing in well known publications mentioning the possibility of second and third potential energy wells that exhibit some special kind of stabilty.
With no replication and no peer review of these papers makes me leery to say the least. This isnt the first time in the past few years stuff similar to this has been claimed either. This "Proton-21" laboratory in the Ukraine claims to make singificant amounts of superheavies by focusing intense beams of low energy electrons or something like that. Considering this specific group presents their stuff at "cold fusion" conferences (the quack kind not the heavy ion reaction kind) it is not surprising no one would take this particular specific claim seriously or use research time and money to try to verify it.