focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Afternoon, quick question is the latest Edison report dated 03/04/24? Just want to clarify I’m reading the latest report
Morning Celtic - that's just how business works sometimes. We just have to wait and see.
Hi hot. Selling on? Is that good for us? Might we mot get the full value?
Celtic - it's near enough 4mths since the license was announced and there isn't even a hint of who has it in any corner of the internet. For all we know it's been renamed and is currently undergoing preclinical research in combination with other drugs prior to trials in humans.
I keep looking on the US clinical trials website for any newly registered trials mentioning chk1 or anything that could be linked to 737 - nothing to report so far.
We can't even say for sure if our own BoD know who has it. You'd have thought the US firm would announce the deal in a 'look at us! see what we're doing now!' kind of way. I can only hope bigger games are being played behind the scenes and we'll all be pleasantly surprised when we know what's really going on.
Although Potnak suggests it might be with a small company looking to do a bit of work on it before selling it on (which is plausible), I'd be surprised if the CPF picked a small company over a larger pharma to progress 737 (assuming large pharma were interested).
In a nutshell, I'm stumped.
Thanks hot. I also think same as you, they know that it was potential combo blockbuster from all the data and they would make sense . Dont understand why these companies hide their details from us...
CHK 1 has shown great data on combo in humans so we know it works and a umet market there with anogenital and other cancers.....
Hopefully new pharmaceutical that has taken will show their trie colours and take it forward.... hopefully we know by November I think? Any views appreciated ta
Hi Celtic - any intellectual property Sierra was able to develop whilst 737 was licensed to them should be handed over to the CRT Pioneer Fund as they are the owners of 737 (we are only financial beneficiaries if there's a commercial license). This doesn't stop anyone from patenting a novel use of the compound e.g. the Celtic007 Pharmaceuticals & Dangerous Toy Company Ltd doesn't own the rights to 737 but you could patent a use which if approved means someone would have to pay you a fee if their use infringes your patent.
If you look at another patent (see below) and click on the 'show all events' filter in the right-hand column, you'll see an entry dated 5/2/24 that says the patent is assigned to CRT Pioneer Fund.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20210077499A1/en?oq=US20210077499A1
It's possible all IP has been handed over by Sierra but the admin side is yet to filter through to all the patents. I still think our mystery licensee is Sierra (again) as they have so much work in the compound & patents.
Just my thoughts on this one Potnak.
I would suggest that it may very well be that 1802 has a higher selectivity over Jak3 than 1801
As far as l can remember there was a Jak 3 inhibitor Ruxolitinib ( not sure if spelled correctly)
that was used and approved in some haematology cancers some years ago. I also am of the belief that it was to be approved for T ALL cancer just a few years back.
The point here is that whilst Jak3 may well be adept at cancers it does knacker the immune system leading to increased risk of infections.
Jak3 can only pair with Jak1.
I would suggest also along with T ALL cancer it may prove effective in colon or bowel cancer.
Now, UC and CD have a high tenancy to lead to colon or bowel cancer.
Such is the close link here between the 2 that dependant on severity 1802 may prove to have greater efficacy in UC and CD.
I may be off my nut, but is just my way of thinking on this.
Regards
Surely when sierra handed back then all patents went back to us? What use is them having a patent but not that molecule? Thanks
If anything was to trigger a TO, it's the similarities in 1801 and 2. It would make sense to buy up both, to lock in all indications. If SAR do on license 1801, then 1802, if it goes elsewhere may become a competitor and it gets messy. I don't think the TO scenario is likely but the chance to cover dozens of indications, immune and cancer must be on some radar somewhere.
Looks like Sierra are keeping a tight grip on patents covering 737. The link below shows a Japanese application was published on 30/1/24 so they're obviously happy to keep paying for the patent process though not sure if it's now effectively assigned to CPF.
https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/result.jsf?_vid=P22-LVMG62-27469
More than likely will go to different partners.
SDC1802 may well prove very encouraging in auto immune. Whilst similar in the compounds there does exist a difference.
Bare in mind that 1802 was being tested in SLE.
It is not beyond probability that preclinical data on 1802 may well indicate areas of auto immune that 1802 would have greater efficacy in.
However, even if this was not the case, anybody that the licensed was obtained by, could not use the 1802 compound for auto immune conditions, without additional payment for the use of.
Had this patent not been obtained, in theory a licence owner could trial in Indications and may be obtain approval for clinical use in auto immune. In this case Sareum would receive no funds as not in the patent description.
My own personal opinion is that SDC1801 would lack efficacy on cancer. I may be wrong.
We have a point here with auto immune in that could 1802 prove competitive against 1801 on some auto immune conditions such as UC or CD?
We will get to know in time.
Regards
Hi SOG or anyone who has, an opinion. With the latest patent news covering 1802 for immune too. Does that make it more or less likely that the TYK2 compounds could go to separate partners? Also, does that mean that 1801 could cover some cancers?
No adverse effects up to 300mg per day.
Thst on its own is satisfactory.
In addition we await PK and biomarker data which will give an insight as to the most promising Indications that SDC1801 is likely to have most efficacy in on top of Psoriasis.
Boyasaka - the BoD already has enough info for them to announce they are looking to start P2a trials this year but you ask what if the data isn't positive? Without positive data the BoD will have announced their own demise which would be an odd thing to do.
SDC-1801 moving steadily through the clinic (P3)
If the Phase Ia data are not positive?
SDC-1801 moving steadily through the clinic (P3)
If the Phase Ia data are positive, we believe Sareum will likely seek potential out-licensing opportunities, whereby a
prospective partner would be responsible for undertaking the next phase of clinical development as well as subsequent commercialisation.