The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
Cleanerworld
The NHS won't be paying for Modernal's vaccine - Moderna will be paying the NHS to run their clinical trials.
Good find WTP
the 26 th of April The good law project are questioning Sunak relationship with his fund Thelme and Moderna. A £400,000 Bespoke vaccine per patient ( as the times are now calling it ) a 10 year contract / tie in with the NHS is questionable ? belt and braces measure, after surgery . So how much is the total cost ? tIt’s a very interesting debate. Please read this link.
https://goodlawproject.org/government-ordered-to-disclose-sunaks-hedge-fund-emails/#:~:text=Shortly%20after%20Sunak%20became%20prime,a%20financial%20interest%20in%20Theleme.
I knew it was expensive, but not that expensive?
"New £400,000 melanoma vaccine heralds start of 'cancer renaissance' as UK trials personalised jabs for lung, bowel, pancreas and liver tumours... but experts fear NHS can't afford them"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13353713/New-400-000-melanoma-vaccine-heralds-start-cancer-renaissance-UK-trials-personalised-jabs-lung-bowel-pancreas-liver-tumours-experts-fear-NHS-afford-them.html?ico=topics_pagination_mobile
Bermuda
I understand perfectly the point you are making. The two trials are different so we are not comparing apples with apples. The measure of 49% improvement over keytruda alone is a measurement that is irrelevant to the Scib1 trial results since keytruda did not figure in this trial.
However, given the fact that scib1 alone gave such outstanding results in the adjuvant setting, must surely be relevant information if and when a pharma is assessing scib1 overall. Surely any prospective partners would be thinking along the lines of conducting a scib1 or iscib1 trial in combination with keytruda trial in the adjuvant setting. This would be in addition to taking the current scope setting into a phase 3 trial.
“ Just matching the results of a personalised vaccine with an off the shelf solution should be enough.”……
…..correct. Very clearly we are not yet at the point of being able to compare like with like but it seems to me that achieving tumour shrinkage in unresectable melanoma is at least as relevant for treatment as an increased expectancy of non-recurrence of a tumour that has been removed. Especially if the costs are lower and the elapsed time to end of treatment is shorter.
CW...yes you'd think the likes of NICE/NHS would definitely prefer something off the shelf and far cheaper than the very costly personalised approach.
Thinking allowed the bespoke vaccine will take longer and be more expensive to produce. So could cause a significant delay
The off the shelf offering from Scancell could reach the required patient numbers quicker
Pros and cons of both vaccines.
Ray,
SCIBI has produced some fablulous results in the adjuvant setting albeit in small numbers in a single arm trial but as a monotherapy. The issue I have with comparing the 49% from the Moderna vax's with SCIB1 lies with that 49% fiigure. If it represented the RFS rate of the Moderna arm of the trial then I can see how you might start to make a comparison, but it doesn't. It's the improvement in the likelihood of a recurrence compared to the results produced by Keytruda alone. So in that trial the Moderna patients were 49% less likely to have recurrence compared to the patients on the same trial receiving Keytruda alone. We have absolutely no clinical results from SCIB1 to compare that with.
Moderna still have to a long way to go with this vaccine. There's the Phase 3 clinical trial itself, a double blind randomised study in just under 1100 patients and then there's the whole process of seeking approval with the various regulators. It will be fantastic for Scancell if they're successful and should Scancell ever want to revisit the adjuvant setting with SCIB1 it might even provide an easier path through to approval. Just matching the results of a personalised vaccine with an off the shelf solution should be enough.
From Inan on the other board...
"lets assume that moderna and merck get approval ...
and they become the standard of care
Opdivo and Yervoy left in the cold
Bristol Myers being a poor relative losing business thinks ....
we want that market .... SCIB1 tested with our product is stunning ...
Ok .. make a move"
On sky news as well
Just noticed the headline has changed in The Times from :
Skin cancer jab trial targets high-risk melanomas
New headline
Bespoke cancer vaccine targets tumours in landmark trial
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e23343c5-91c4-49b0-9fa4-c1eec5c2bb2c?shareToken=
They are discussing the MRNA skin cancer vax btw
Good listen. I have whattsapped them about SCIB1. Expect to be ignored!
Bear in mind that there has already been a clinical trial for SCIB1 on it own (i.e. without checkpoint inhibitors) in the adjuvant setting.
The numbers were small in the trial and the delivery method was different to that of the current SCOPE trial.
However, the famous swimchart is testament to the high level of success in this trial, albeit with the limitations stated in the previous sentence.
This will not escape the notice of pharma keeping their eyes on SCIB1 and iSCIB1+ results.
For years cancer vaccines were considered a no go area. so this exposure is a great thing as we obviously think ours is better and universal, cheaper and currently with better results subject to expansion of trial.
Perhaps this may be the nudge needed for a bid approach 🤔 🙏
Ee
I apologise if I should have understood that from your post but it wasn't obvious to me because SCIB1 has never been trialled in this setting - ie. in combination with PD-1 CPI in the adjuvant setting. So how can you compare at this stage?
Keytruda is approved as an adjuvant therapy in melanoma and the Moderna trial was a randomised study with Ketruda alone as the control arm versus Keytruda plus the Moderna Vax. So the 49% figure is the reduction in the risk of recurrence/death when taking the combination versus treatment with Keytruda alone.
That is the whole point of my last sentence - if the phase III study is successful it validates the combination setting for cancer vaccines.
Bermuda,
It should have been totally obvious to you that I was drawing a comparison with SCIB1 and its potential effectiveness. 🙄
Plainly if “the only game in town” offers some smallimprovement, you would take it.
Bermuda,
I thought the same when I read the post - I'd jump at the chance of a 44% better chance of survival. (The figure in the daily mail article)
I'm not sure this halves the chances.we'd need to know the figure it's an improvement on.
Ee
Seriously? Think if I was about to face surgery to have melanoma removed but was told I was in the very high risk category of it returning and someone offered me a vax which halved the chances of recurrence I'd jump at it. Credit where credit is due.
Success of any cancer vaccine is great news for Scancell but as 2cvguy mentioned earlier, this is particularly important as it establishes the utility of cancer vaccines in combination with checkpoint inhibitors.
As mentioned earlier in the week by Bermuda
A DNA plasmid melanoma cancer vaccine, SCIB1, combined with nivolumab + ipilimumab in patients with advanced unresectable melanoma: Efficacy and safety results from the open-label phase 2 SCOPE trial.
article
Abstract
Authors
Heather Shaw
Heather Shaw
Mount Vernon Cancer Center
Heather Shaw, Poulam Patel, Miranda Payne, Satish Kumar, Sarah Danson, Martin Highley, Kellati Prasad, Ruth Board, Clare Barlow, James Larkin, Kate Young, Amanda Fitzpatrick, Ioannis Karydis, Maria Marples, Rebecca Lee, Philippa Corrie, Robert Miller, Georgia Goodhew, Fayaz Master, Lindy Durrant
Organizations
Mount Vernon Cancer Center, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Churchill Hospital, Velindre Cancer Centre, Weston Park Cancer Centre, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust & University of Sheffield, Derriford Hospital, Lancashire University Hospital, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Musgrove Park Hospital, Somerset Foundation Trust, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, St. James's University Hospital, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Scancell Ltd
Thanks C11,
Just to add that both may prove to have further utility and each will plough it's own furrow so to speak. It is important to remember the development opportunities that may arise from these types of platform. There-in lays the real value me thinks. But first lets get iSCIB1+ validated!
Bermuda, thanks for your reply to my concern!
This is the lead story in The Daily Telegraph today. A 49% improvement doesn’t sound enough for a personalised vaccine to me. Lets hope that one of the reasons for Scancell’s recent quiet period in RNSs is that they are preparing a blockbuster update - together with attendant front page publicity!
Violindog,
Sorry, missed your post. Don't worry, the Moderna clinical trial won't have any impact on recruitment to the SCIB1 trial because it's in a different setting and recruiting from a different patient population. Moderna's trial is in the adjuvant setting - patients who have had their tumours surgically removed and are vaccinated to prevent recurrence whereas Scancell's trial is recruiting patients with advanced inoperable melanoma with tumour in situ.