Member Info for Bermudashorts

I don't think so Chelsea, maybe it was someone else.

Morning Chelsea,

Re. your 5.46, you said:-

'I seem to remember BS suggesting leading Pharmas could be casting there eyes over here for trials'

Are you talking about Avidimab or another product?

LochnivarLass,

Sorry, just to be clear, you do realise that the RNS posted by Ray refers to the original SCIB1 trial which was completed several years ago? Apologies if I've got it wrong, but your posts suggested you might think it was the current trial .

Crumbs,

Don't forget a company has been built around her - created purely to allow her to develop her research. Investors have backed her with something like £30m. By anyone's standards that has to count as being given a chance.

Dalester,

You have no need to apologise and your post didn't sound pessimistic - it sparked some interesting discussion. Comments in subsequent posts regarding negativity, claptrap or nonsense weren't aimed at you (in case you thought they did).

Dalester,

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to copy across that post. I think it's highly unlikely that Scancell's products will be developed for veterinary use.

WTP

Re. share options, don't get too hung up on the exercise price - it's usually simply a reflection on the average share price over period at the time they were granted. Nearly all, if not all of share options granted to Scancell directors are linked to certain performance targets. If they meet those targets then they can exercise those options by buying at the exercise price. If they don't meet the targets or decide not to exercise the options by the end of the exercise period then they will lapse.

The 4.5p options are a bit of a special case. Back in 2010 LD and RG were granted options over 385k and 288k shares at an exercise price of 45p - ( becoming 3.85m and 2.88m at a price of 4.5p after the share split in 2011). The exercise price was just set at the same level as an open offer in March 2010. They could only be exercised if the BOD managed to secure a deal for the sale of the Company for a figure in excess of £25m.

These options should have expired in 2015 but unusually, were amended to extend the exercise period until July 2020. The performance criteria was also amended at the same time. If they aren't exercised by 14th July then they should lapse.

Inanaco,

I don't know how we ended up talking about share options but worth noting those 4.5p share options expire next week.

I'm not talking about detailed information, just a high level overview but I accept that there may be good reasons for their silence and they clearly feel that they don't need to update shareholders at the moment.

Ruck, sorry posts crossed

Chelsea/Dick,

Just noticed a couple of posts to me that I missed last night.

Chelsea - My point is that the negatives are already out there, we know there's a pandemic, we know cancer diagnosis, treatment and clinical trials have been severely impacted, labs have been shut etc.etc. So we already have the negatives but they're compounded by uncertainly because we're guessing about their impact. An update that shows they're in control and proactively managing their way through this crisis would be positive and demonstrate that Scancell value their shareholders enough to bother keeping them informed. IMO.

Dracula - I assume/hope the next bit of news will be around funding for the COVID vaccine. The great thing about bios though is anything could come completely out of the blue.

'Patience sometimes is a virtue'

You'll be pleased to know that I'm speechless!

lol Inanaco,

Have another read and note the comma after the word 'negative'.

ie; When I said ' being unreasonable, negative, after a short term trade '

after means seeking, looking for NOT at a later time

The joys of internet communicaton.

Chelsea,

Regarding SCIB1, assuming the trial is on hold, I'd say something along the lines of:-

'The SCIB1 clinical trial has been placed on hold in order to protect patients and allow NHS resources to be diverted to dealing with COVID-19. Whilst patients have been screened for suitability to join the SCIB1 trial, none have yet been dosed and therefore, fortunately the hold placed on this trial will have no adverse impact on data integrity or continuity. We continue to plan to ensure that as soon as clinical trials are able to resume we are best placed to resume the study as quickly as possible. To this end, we will be opening 3 additional trial centres in Oxford, Cardiff and Northwood. '

In other words this is the issue, this is the impact and this is what we're doing about it. A positive coming out of a negative situation.

What do you mean? What point are you trying to make?

Chelsea,

There seems to be some confusion over this update/communication issue. This isn't about getting answers to detailed questions, it's about Scancell reassuring shareholders that they have identified potential areas of risk, have strategies in place to mitigate any impact and are in a strong position to weather the storm.

We are in unprecedented and very uncertain times and shareholders are looking to companies to demonstrate that they are proactively managing their companies through this crisis.

This is a general point and not addressed to you at all Chelsea, but I'm getting a strong message from this bb that those who would like an update are somehow being unreasonable, negative, after a short term trade and that they don't understand the science or potential of Scancell. That could not be further from the case.

IMO of course.

Sorry Inanaco, are you suggesting that NDAs are preventing Scancell from issuing an update?

Inanaco,

I was thinking of the clinical trial protocol. I assume they'd keep the SCIB1 dosing schedule the same but the dosing regime for Keytruda is currently once every 3 weeks, so assume they'd need to apply to FDA/MHRA for a protocol amendment. Not a big issue but probably something they could do without.

Anyway, most likely won't arise and Nottingham will simply resume recruitment and at some stage Scancell will tell us about the new UK study centres and hopefully US ones too.

Interesting, I know in the US they've been trying to find all sorts of ways to keep clinical trials going - including visiting the patient at home to administer the drugs. Of course that's not an option for the SCIB1 trial. From Scancell's point of view, I hope they don't like this new dosing regime so much that they stick with it or are slow to change back, although it may be much better for patients, especially in the US.

As for holding up the SCIB1 trial, I really don't think that's the case - the trial had been up and running for 6 months prior to lockdown and hadn't dosed a single patient - think it's much more likely that it was simply put on hold. I'm happy to explain my reasoning if you like. Having said that, this is a perfect example of why it would have been good if Scancell had issued an update on the impact of COVID-19, we shouldn't have to guess about something so fundamentally important to Scancell's core business.

Bronx,

Yep, hope nobody gets too excited by that - we haven't seen the research note and have no idea of the assumptions behind that valuation. Right now, I'm just pleased to see that it appears they have some analyst coverage . As you know, its' not easy, which is why so many AIM bios end up having to resort to paid for research from the likes of Hardman and Trinity Delta. It's also crucial if you're going to make a success of it on NASDAQ where the competition to stand out is much more fierce. Hopefully in time they'll be able to secure more.