Member Info for Bermudashorts

Novelion issued an update yesterday on their plans for voluntary liquidation following the sale of Aegerion to Amryt. From their update:-

'In the Aegerion Transaction, reorganized Aegerion became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amryt, and Novelion received American depository receipts (“ADRs”) representing approximately 14.0 million ordinary shares of Amryt (the “Amryt Equity”) in full satisfaction of Novelion’s claims as creditor under the secured intercompany loan between Aegerion and Novelion.
The Company currently expects that, before the Effective Date, it will sell approximately $2.0 million (USD) in value of the Amryt Equity through a private, arm’s-length transaction or series of transactions'

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/novelion-therapeutics-provides-updates-on-voluntary-liquidation-and-other-matters-1028709870

.........and Moderna getting towards $7b now. Between them, less than a handful of phase II drugs in their pipeline and the rest all preclinical or phase I. Madness. So much excitement around mRNA, hope it lives up to expectations when clinical data starts coming through.

Small write-up on diagnostic potential of Parsortix in prostate cancer
https://www.justobserver.com/258/new-blood-test-could-eliminate-biopsies-for-prostate-cancer

corr - delete word 'their'

LSE Admin - this site needs an edit function!

what do you mean where was the volume? The placing shares were admitted to AIM on 15th - they won't show in the trading volume, the number of shares in issue simply increased by 142,857,143 from 342m to 485m. If Peel Hunt took part in that placing then their any stock they bought is part of that 142m and won't be listed as a trade.

No big conspiracy theory and enough issues here already without creating more.

https://investegate.co.uk/aim/rns/aim-notice---15-11-2019/201911150800024815T/

They most likely were part of the 142m shares that were admitted to AIM on 15th November which also just happens to be the date the disclosure threshold was crossed according to the TR1.

1) 2nd October - Conditional placing announced
2) 14th November - General meeting held and conditions for placing satisfied
3) 15th November - New equity (142,857,143 shares) admitted to AIM
4) 15th November - date Peel Hunt acquired stock

Leas,

That's a bugger, hope it's sorted soon.

Ray,

I've wondered about that too. I thought Scancell had previously said that the original Moditope patent covered any citrullinated peptide but perhaps I'm not remembering correctly.

WTP

Konar is your best bet for the answer to this one but my take is as follows.

It's a long-winded process whereby the application undergoes examination, the examiner raises objections and then Scancell argue their case or amend the claims to overcome those objections. That can happen several times over for each patent office. AFAIK there is nothing to suggest that all O/S patents won't eventually be granted although there may still be some amendments to the claims but obviously it's completely down to the examiner in each jurisdiction.

We now know the European Enolase patent is about to be granted which must give hope for the US counterpart. Also the European divisional application for the DNA version of Moditope has recently been re-examined and revised claims were submitted at the end of October. Hopefully that one is now very close to being granted too.

In answer to your final question, I just don't know whether any potential partner would need to see all patents granted before making any move, nor do I know how important the screening divisional application is to Scancell. I would have thought that any deal could be structured to cover any O/S patents but WDIK?

ps. Inanaco, last sentence of this post was a rhetorical one, no need for any answers :)

I'll take that as confirmation that you can't provide the evidence.

Good to hear from you, hope life is treating you well and your portfolio is treating you even better!!

I was referring to the clinical disease setting of the patient population ie. bulky tumour as opposed to resected. I will repeat one last time - you have not produced any evidence whatsoever that the preclinical mouse data for SCIB1 produced inferior results to the clinical trial.

Re. Your point re. PD-1 and 'reverse engineering ... Human to mouse' . The SCIB1 trial was successful with some highly encouraging results which supported the hypothesis of a SCIB1/PD-1 combination. Further preclinical research on mice was carried out and this has not yet been validated in clinical trials and is completely irrelevant to the original post you made which was that 'Scancells success in the mouse model was exceeded in Trial ....'

No wriggling here. It doesn't matter what the purpose of the research was - it was done on mice with bulky tumour in situ - the setting for the current SCIB1 trial. You have produced no evidence whatsoever that the clinical results for SCIB1 were superior to the mouse data and you should delete your post.

Do you not understand that the logical train of thought is that if the mice data are so good, if they were exceeded in the clinic, if SCIB1/PD-1 synergy is proven and if there is no risk then most folk would be asking themselves why on earth Scancell has failed to secure a deal for this platform? Scancell have told us that they need clinical data - there's a reason for that.

Patients with bulky tumours in situ is the precise the setting for the current SCIB1 trial. The preclinical mouse data for SCIB1 was not exceeded in the clinic and you should ask admin to remove your 12.35 because it is incorrect.

You might also like to apologise to those you were calling gullible.

Very sorry to hear about your friend. Scancell don't have any treatments for Non-Hodgkin lymphoma but there are great strides being made in the treatment of blood cancers at the moment with some truly amazing results. Would suggest that a good starting place might be the NHS clinical trials gateway (let me know if you need a link) and then discuss with her consultant.

Wish her the very best of luck.

Yes, all there on pages 1086 and 1087. 'large bulky tumours completely rejected and 20% of animals cured.'.

Those results were not exceeded in the SCIB1 trial.

SCIB1? ie. gp100 and TRP-2?

'one' should be 'a link'

I don't think otherwise because I haven't seen the preclinical data in mice for SCIB1 which was why I asked you for one but no worries if you haven't either.

Yes, good to see you posting and hope you're keeping well.