Member Info for Bermudashorts

Crackin,

Good to see that you are far more positive about Scancell.

Crackin,

lol I'm not sure how you have the nerve to talk about poor funding decisions and VAL in the same thread. I completely agree that until now Scancell haven't been bold enough with their funding strategy, on the other hand, they have never resorted to bucket shop fundings and nor are they drowning in warrants.

The two companies are completely different in so many respects and you are beating Scancell longs over the head with a quick trading profit on Val - totally different investment propositions and it's horses for courses.

Crackin

'Maybe it will be Scancell next to trend upwards but it will take a lot more trial progress and strategic delivery before you see some significant value'

Absolutely correct and that's exactly why most longs are sticking with Scancell - they actually have a chance of real trial progress with genuinely successful results.

Just IMO of course.

Ergomed are running 2 free webinars on the patient experience & an introduction to drug development and clinical trials
- Of all the rare diseases in the world only 5% have a treatment – meaning 95% do not!

- According to the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), 85% of patients are unaware of clinical trials as an option at the time of their diagnosis.
- Patients and families dealing with rare diseases will often hear about clinical trials, without understanding what the process entails.
- A lack of awareness and understanding is recognized as being one of the greatest barriers to clinical trial participation by patients.

Our experts want to dispel the mystery and confusion about clinical trials from the patients’ perspective.
Our goal is to help educate patients and their families who are dealing with rare disease, providing useful information about what is involved in clinical research.

https://www.ergomedplc.com/free-webinar-the-patient-experience-introduction-to-drug-development-and-clinical-trials/

Candid -

Yes, that's my understanding - sunflower oil gel.

You may or may not know that Amicus took the highly unusual and very generous step of allowing Amryt access to the full data set from their failed EB trial. Having reviewed Amicus' data, Amryt made some changes to the AP101 trial protocol. From memory, I'm pretty sure that one of the changes was to restrict recruitment to the more severe forms of EB which should help to lessen the risk of a good response from the placebo group. With less severe forms of EB, wounds will be smaller and quicker to heal and it's therefore more difficult to demonstrate statistical significance when looking at the difference in healing times between the placebo and treatment arms. Whether the changes are enough, only time will tell!

IMO, DYOR etc. etc.

Moving on, worth a quick read of the Forbes article below which is all about Patrick Soon-Shiong. It's an interesting article in itself but the relevance for Scancell comes about half-way down the page with the paragraph that starts with the words 'Since February..' where they start to discuss his COVID-19 vaccine. It's another adenovirus vaccine but they're one of the few companies also targeting the nucleocapsid protein:-

'Most of the more than 100 vaccines that are currently in clinical development for Covid-19 focus on the spike protein to generate an immune response. Soon-Shiong thinks that won’t be enough, though, which is why he’s including the nucleocapsid protein. “My concern is that the spike protein mutates,” he says. “It’s mutated even through this pandemic.” '

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2020/08/27/the-inside-story-of-biotechs-barnum-and-his-covid-cures/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_content=3636946842&utm_campaign=sprinklrForbesTechTwitter#5fd79455208a

Share options don't pose les risk - they pose no risk whatsoever and that's why they're sort of irrelevant to the point about directors buying shares. The two issues seem to have become mixed in the debates yesterday but I didn't catch all the posts before they were removed. Also, CH shouldn't have any say in whether or not he is granted share options so it's not for him to choose between options and buying shares.

I believe that the whole debate started when Knowlesi said that he was more positive about Scancell now, but would like to see the CEO buy some shares. There will be many others who feel the same and it was a reasonable comment IMO. Just as reasonable were the replies from those who felt that whether or not CH buys shares is his own business and were perfectly happy with the fact that he hadn't.

AFAIK, no Scancell director has ever exercised any of their share options, indeed the 4.5p options have recently lapsed. In reality, with these early stage bios, options are rarely exercised but are a way of allowing the BOD to benefit from spectactuar deals or takeovers - if Scancell were taken over, the deal would be structured to compensate the holders of any unexercised share options.

There really isn't any more to it - some people think one thing, others disagree and there is no right or wrong answer but that's fine isn't it?

Shareguard,

'he also doesnt want to throw away money if he doesnt think the time is right for his initial purchase.'

Blimey, any CEO who thinks along those lines probably is in the wrong job.

Not sure whether this has already been posted but a new article has been published in Nature Research with a great summary of 4D Pharma. Worth noting that I think this artucle has been paid for and written by 4D pharma themselves, nevertheless it's a good starting point for any new to the company.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d43747-020-01006-2

Excellent webinar, quite technical and obviously aimed at the life sciences analysts. If nothing else, worth looking at slide no. 27 which is about 25/26 minutes in which gives more detail of their preclinical reasearch for MRX0029 and MRX0005 in Parkinson's disease. Treated/untreated photos of neurons and the brain are really interesting and will be great to see how these LBPs perform in real patients.

Burble,

The application in your link was filed in the UK and is awaiting publication. They'll follow the standard PCT process so will apply for protection in the usual jurisdictions, not just the UK. There are also 3 or 4 other new applications which have been filed and are awaiting publication - title is just 'Binding Members' so may just refer to the individual mAbs rather than the Avidimab platform.

Also, I'd have thought that some of the patents were originally applied for by the University of Nottingham rather than Scancell, so may also be worth checking for any applications in their name.

It's a divisional application (split off from original, now granted moditope patent) and covers DNA vaccines.

If the deal hasn't already been announced, let's hope CH is able to shed a little more light on this at the AGM but there are so many variables here:-

- just one mAb target, all of them or any combination of the 5
- including avidimab or not
- avidimab alone
- exclusive/non-exclusive
- restricted to certain cancers
- restricted to certain geographical locations
- for use in CAR T therapy
- as an ADC

No doubt all will become clear and in a way, almost as important as the £££ is who the deal is with.

Crumbs thanks for the link - will try and listen again over the weekend. Ivy, spot on re. expectations.

Crumbs,

Thanks for that and think it's an important point to clarify because CH's proactive presentation raised slightly different expectations from the statement from the Company at the time of the fundraise:-

'Under the terms of the collaboration and research agreements, Scancell and its partners will evaluate the potential of the anti-TaG mAbs, in these various formats. The Company expects these collaboration and research agreements could transition into potential partnerships. Advanced commercial discussions are currently underway with a global biotech with initial commercial collaboration potentially to be in the form of granting a partner an option to a future licence.'

So are we saying that one of the collaborations has led to a further collaboration with an option to license, but with a financial element to the deal(as opposed to a full licensing deal) ? Perhaps the confusion lies between the fact that there are likely to be separate deals for the TA glycan targets and Avidimab, as alluded to by Dragon last night.

Hopefully we'll get some clarity at the AGM

As I say, I need to listen to CH's exact words last night, but I came away with the impression he was talking about signing a licensing deal yet the sentence from the fundraising circular suggests it's a collaboration with an option to license which is a completely different thing. Why would you have a collaboration in place for a year with a company evaluating the product and then sign another collaboration at the end?

Crumbs/Ivy

Need to have another listen to exactly what CH said last night but if one of the existing agreements is coming to fruition and a licensing deal is shortly to be announced then how does that fit with comments in the fundraising RNS?

' Advanced commercial discussions are currently underway with a global biotech with initial
commercial collaboration potentially to be in the form of granting a partner an option to a future licence.'

Is this the same partner and deal or another?

Burble,

Just a quick note to say thanks very much for your input - the bb is a much better place for it and I'm sure it's appreciated by all.

chester,

Agreed - other cancer trials are back, up and running and actively recruiting both here and in the US. Scancell really, really need to hit their published timescales now and build on good news flow.

Crumbs,

Spot on. We don't know whether it'll be a deal for just one mAb or more than one but I assume it would be a non-exclusive deal. So for a deal to be struck, they must have produced good results during their evaluation, which bodes well for the findings of the other interested parties..

Completely agree, not the right format for going into too much detail, but great presentation as always.