Member Info for Bermudashorts

Agree that we need confirmation from Scancell that the Mirror article is correct and that they do have a manufacturing agreement in place, perhaps an update now from Scancell is required to clear up any confusion.

rats,

In reply to your 10.38, you've probably already seen it now but tenzng kindly posted details of The Times article earlier this morning so I'm going to bump it up as it's getting a bit lost:-

Scientists at rival universities have complained that their applications for state funding have gone unanswered. Nottingham University has teamed up with AIM-listed biotech start-up Scancell to repurpose its cancer vaccine tech for the coronavirus.
Lindy Durrant, chief scientific officer of Scancell and a professor of cancer immunology at Nottingham, has developed a vaccine that prompts a T-cell response and virus-neutralising antibodies against Sars-Cov-2, the virus that causes Covid-19. Scancell believes the combination could lead to longer-lasting immunity.

Unlike the Imperial and Oxford projects, Scancell is yet to receive any funding. Requests to UK Research and Innovation, responsible for handing out grants, have so far gone unanswered. Instead, senior executives have taken a 20% pay cut in order to fund the early-stage work; they will need several million pounds in funding to begin human trials.
“If we get modest funding we can start at the beginning of next year,” said Durrant. “If we get a bit more, we could start in the next three months.” Durrant remains hopeful that ministers will eventually respond to Scancell’s pleas.

New information from both articles and gives us a much clearer picture here - thanks very much for taking the time and trouble to share.

Crumbs are you sure? This is from the link posted the other day:-

'Donating to our Emergency Appeal will advance our essential coronavirus research and emergency student support, including:
Developing a safe and effective vaccine to prevent COVID-19, adapting an existing cancer vaccine platform to provide an effective and durable immune response to COVID-19.
Identifying and developing novel treatments for COVID-19, as well as assessing the risk for future pandemic events.
Ensuring that students have the essential financial support they need to continue their studies.'

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/research/covid-19/covid-19-emergency-appeal/covid-19-emergency-appeal.aspx

They may well also be seeking grant funding from Government or philanthropic institutions but it certainly seems that part of the funds raised by the Nottingham appeal will go to Covidity development.

Ivy, my experience is the opposite - very much conditional upon performance targets and if you didn't meet the targets there was no extension!

Inanaco,

Thanks - that answers that one.

Ivy,

I'm sure someone will be able to correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think any member of the BOD has yet exercised any of their options. To be fair that's probably the situation with the vast majority of AIM stocks I've held. If the big deal/sale happens then they're a tax efficient way for the BOD to benefit and under those circumstances, I don't think anyone would begrudge them that. However, as posted earlier I certainly would object to simply extending the exercise period every time any unexercised options are due to lapse.

Inanaco ,

I'm not sure that's the case and I wonder whether you might be thinking of David Evans' options. The only references I can find to the original vesting criteria are from the annual reports:-

'Professor Lindy Durrant and Dr Richard Goodfellow have been granted 3,850,000 and 2,880,000 options, respectively in Scancell Holdings plc, exercisable at 4.5 pence per share. These options vest and become capable of exercise on the sale of the company for a value in excess of £25m.'

Also of course, when the Remuneration Committee agreed to extend the options in 2016 could they also have revised the vesting criteria? So they may or may not be able to exercise those options - either way I very much hope they're not extended for a second time. Whilst I fully agree that options are an excellent way of incentivising the BOD, if they don't vest and/or aren't exercised then you can't just keep extending them, thereby maintaining an exercise price that was appropriate over a decade ago. If options are warranted then issue new ones with a current exercise price.

Michaelhighbar,

The 4.5p options should have expired in 2015 but the exercise period was extended by the Company for a further 5 years to July 2020. They only vest upon achievement of certain performance objectives - so whilst it would be great to see directors actually exercising some of their options, if they haven't met the performance goals then they won't be able to.

- combined revenue up by 13% for full year to $154.1M
- Q1 2020 revenue up by 30% to $44.6M
- $67.0M in cash
- F-1 submitted to SEC in Feb for proposed NASDAQ listing
- AP101 phase III trial closed for recruitment and results expected Q3/Q4 2020
- Impact of COVID-19 minimized by fact patients are on treatment for long periods leading to recurring revenue

Seems that the integration of Aegerion has gone well and a very different Amryt has emerged and is off to a strong start.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/AMYT/14533837.html

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/AMYT/14533931.html

Re. your 7.07, not much to report I'm afraid. I assume the next thing for Scancell will either be news of funding or more detail on the vaccine itself. The only mildly interesting thing I've found is that the University of Nottingham filed a new patent application on 20th March, title 'Antiviral compounds and methods'. It appeared in this week's patent journal and we wont know any more about it until it's published. It may or may not be connected with the Covidity project.

Olderandwiser - they are!

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04344041

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04334005

At times this bb is little more than a forum for posters to air their political views and Admin. need to put a stop to it. We are all intelligent enough to read, research and make our own minds up and if we want to discuss it, I'm sure there are plenty of appropriate forums - but this isn't one of them!

For once there's plenty going on with Scancell and that's what we should be talking about.

You can see the interview by going to the link in WTP's 9.57 post - at about -.139 in

https://news.sky.com/story/watch-sky-news-live-10315632

Back to Scancell, below is a link to the University of Nottingham press release regarding COVIDITY. I'm sure it's been posted before but I had missed it. Interesting to read more detail regarding who is contributing what under the 'About the COVID-19 Vaccine Collaboration Members' section.

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/news/covid19-vaccine

Thanks LL.

Regarding your link, yes, AMR is an area of special interest to me and it's not just the UK - the whole world is ill equipped to deal with the antibiotic resistance.

Whilst the focus of the World has been on climate change and now COVID-19 we have all been sleepwalking towards a disaster that will cause more deaths each year than cancer and result in a far, far higher death toll than COVID-19. However, much is going on to tackle the issue and actually the UK Gov. is leading the way - we can and should be proud of their efforts on the international stage regarding AMR.

LochinvarLass

Have you seen an international comparison of hospital survival rates? Have been looking for one so would be grateful if you could post a link if you have it.

Just a quick correction to my earlier post, all of the senior management team are salaried so ignore the fee based comment.

Inanaco,

Are you suggesting that cancer clinical trials have continued during this crisis?

If you think that it has been business as usual for Scancell then that's more reason than ever to give an update - it would literally take an extra 2 minutes whilst drafting the RNS to add in a paragraph confirming that and giving a quick update on where they're at. It would be a very positive message!

Good to see the BOD take a pay cut and obviously this will affect the salaried members of the BOD far more than those who are fee based. However, mixed messages IMO with the award of further share options. Would also have been a perfect opportunity to provide a full update on the impact of COVID-19 on the pipeline. Given the changes to the clinical trials register, I assume that at some stage we'll be getting another update.