Member Info for Bermudashorts

WTP

According to the conference website, Scancell didn't submit any abstracts for the first conference (The Cambridge Healthcare Institute) and it seems that the other 2 have been postponed until October.

Nom,

I understand and feel the same - it's counterintuitive.

However the CMO/CSO have decided that this is the correct approach and that the behavioural science has a role to play. I don't think that decision is borne out of any sense of arrogance but is simply their best professional expert opinion. All we can do is trust the judgement of the most highly qualified experts in the country, and follow their advice.

I'm absolutely certain that the responsibility weighs very heavily on their shoulders and as I say, only time will tell whether they have called it right or not. Is it not too early to prejudge?

Boris is irrelevant - he is for once following the advice of the experts. Only time will tell whether those experts are correct but as far as I can tell their advice is based purely on the science, both of the disease itself and behavioural and given with the very best of intentions rather than any form of arrogance.

Hang on a minute, are you suggesting that the advice given by the UK's CMO and CSO is driven by arrogance?

lol the plot thickens -

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/other/14460186.html

Yep, Yesod back for a second bite of the cherry.

Inanaco,

There is no definitive percentage of the population that gives herd immunity. It depends entirely on how infectious the disease is. Highly infectious diseases such as measles need a vaccination rate of around 95% to 97%. Much, much less infectious diseases come in at around 80% to 85%. Given the nature of COVID-19, you have to assume the required percentage would be at the higher end of the scale.

The other issue is that within the under 60s population are thousands and thousands of people who suffer from a whole range of conditions who would also be at greater risk. There are 5 million people suffering from asthma alone. Where do you draw the line?

lol

Fortunately Ivy was on the case and has tweeted.

Chelsea,

Fair comment but Scancell's peers have been tweeting and it's a very quick, easy and cost free way to draw attention to the fact that for many years now Scancell have been way ahead of the curve when it comes to women in science. Something to be proud of and to celebrate!

LD presenting at another conference in May - Women in Immunology

https://www.oxfordglobal.co.uk/immuno-series-uk/speakers/

As posted on ADVFN by gooosed, it's a shame that Scancell didn't use International Women's Day to highlight the achievements of Lindy Durrant ,or that half of Scancell's management team and I suspect the majority of the R&D team are women in what is still very much a male dominated field. A quick tweet would have been good.

Chelsea, thanks for the link.

Chester, if you believe Scancell are going to open 14 trial sites in the US then it perhaps explains why you think we may have data within a few months. I'm not sure where you got that figure from but I think Scancell have previously mentioned 3 in the US and 2 in the UK. The cost of 14 sites in the US would be prohibitive and a trial on that scale would be at odds with at one recruiting just 25 patients.

This is the perfect example of why it would be good to get the update mentioned in my posts last night.

But Chelsea, it's hardly unfair because Scancell themselves have set those expectations. They have told shareholders that while the IND was delayed the were continuing with planning and preparations and have stated, I quote "Trial ready to start as soon as approval received".

Approval was received a month ago now and I'm not expecting the trial to have started but I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect them to be able to tell shareholders the sort of information listed in my previous post. You ask how it's possible to have these details when you don't have an IND in place - but actually its the other way round. It's unthinkable that they wouldn't have these details in place before submitting the IND.

Anyway, let's hope we get a progress report very soon.

Chester,

Thanks for your explanation.

I don't understand why you even raise point 1 - It's not been suggested that Scancell issue RNSs to prop up the share price and that's not at all what I mean by keeping shareholders engaged. I simply would like to see a timely update on the SCIB1 trial - ie. locations of trial centres, names of investigators, whether they have received IRB approval yet, when the centres are likely to open for recruitment etc. It's really not unreasonable and every bit as valid a reason for an RNS as the one issued this morning. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Regarding the SCIB1 trial data - think we'll have to agree to disagree but I agree that we hope to see a commercial transaction within the next year either for Avidimab, glycan mAbs or ModiTCR .

Chester,

1) As far as I know, nobody has suggested that Scancell do things simply to frustrate investors and I'm not sure where the comment about snake oil comes from.

2) Institutional investors should not be told more than private investors.

3) Unfortunately, there is no way defining data from clinical trials will be available in 12 months.

Sorry Chelsea, my comments were in response to the money driven investors point made by Chester and I was trying to get across that it's important for Scancell to keep those investors engaged - without them there's no chance of any of Scancell's products ever treating patients outside of the clinic.

As for the PDF - am not sure what document you're referring to, do you have a link?

So how do Scancell transform themselves from a baby bio with a very early stage pipeline to that company you dream of, the one whose science is healing gravely ill patients? How is that going to happen without the support of shareholders?

Even the very best science stays in the lab unless it can be progressed through preclinical and clinical development. Scancell have enjoyed the loyalty of many shareholders who have been extremely patient and it is not unreasonable to hope for clear updates on progress and strategy.

Konar,

Completely agree and post recommended. Scancell need to clearly communicate plans for the US trial and exactly where they are in achieving those plans.

Would be interesting to know the lead times on delivery of the Ichor machines and also exactly when Nottingham took delivery of their machine.

Looks like Hygea are still holding Scancell. The Hygea VCT now goes under the name of Seneca Growth Fund and published their annual report last week. Scancell get a few mentions but essentially they originally made a £789k investment in Scancell way back in 2003 and are still holding over just over 13m.

https://www.investegate.co.uk/seneca-growth-capital-vct-plc--hyg-/gnw/final-results/20200227070000H0794/

Inanaco,

Sorry you've lost me. What point are you trying to make?

Matt,

It's a long time ago now but worth remembering that the one commercial success Scancell have had was in glycan mAbs when they sold their pipeline to Peptech for £4.85m. Hopefully history will repeat itself , time will tell.

You also asked about what the Nottingham Trent study means for Scancell and the honest answer is probably not a great deal at the moment. It's very early stage and may or may not progress further. My own take is simply that it's an endorsement of the ImmunoBody platform from Lindy Durrant's peers and therefore positive news.

IMO of course