Member Info for Bermudashorts

Kieran Rooney is attending Bio 2018 in Boston this week. Major partnering conference with over 16,000 attendees and 1100 companies taking part. Let's hope his diary is fully booked with one to one meetings! http://convention.bio.org/2018/

Good to see all 4 study centres now open and recruiting and completion date on track for H2. http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/198154/angle-clinical-study-making-encouraging-progress-198154.html

Yes but good to see that the exercise price of these options incentivises her to improve the share price and none of them can be exercised for 2 years. Only one third can be exercised at current price and the remaining tranches exercise prices and vesting dates as follows:- 600k @ 20p vest immediately 600k @ 27p vest in 1 year 600k @ 35p in vest 1 year 600k @ 42.5p vest in 2 years 600k @ 50p vest in 2 years

http://blogs.nature.com/tradesecrets/2012/06/19/bio-day-1-and-turkey

It's the standard format for these partnering conferences. The short presentation is just a taster but any real business will be conducted via the one to one partnering meetings. I have added a link to a blog on previous bio conference. The photo shows the set up for the one to one meetings. I know the link is old but gives a good idea of the scale of the thing - meeting cubicles as far as the eye can see! I think that out of the 1000+ companies attending only around 200 will be making presentations. It's a massive conference though with over 16000 attendees. http://blogs.nature.com/tradesecrets/2012/06/19/bio-day-1-and-turkey

Afraid not, nothing to do with IMM

The 2nd problem of side effects caused by healthy cells being attacked has been tackled by targeting the antibodies at very specific proteins I guess triggered by glycosylation - sort of small glycans on top of gycans http://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=MR%2FM015564%2F1 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2162402X.2015.1061177

I'll have to dig out the research but my understanding is that NUTAC team have obviously gone away and tackled these problems - as far as I can see in 2 ways. Firstly they think the binding issue is related to the way the antibody is created in the lab and the humanisation process (from the mouse antibody) In very, very simple terms I think they're saying that they were replacing a subclass of the mouse antibody (mouse IgG3) that is needed for efficient binding and so have created a mAb with a 'patch'. I think the part of the recent licensing deal for the glycan mAbs and tech.that refers to 'modification of the constant region (FC) of a human antibody to allow direct tumour killing' is this patch.

Inanaco, I spent some time a while back looking into what happened to those mAbs - posted findings on the twitter group. If you google CEP-37250 you'll find that it's the glycan targeting mAb SC104 and I believe it was taken into a phase I/II trial by Cephalon. The trial was halted early due to lack of efficacy and serious side effects and highlights the big problem with mAbs targeting glycans - firstly the antibody doesn't bind well and so not enough patients respond and secondly it can target healthy cells too so not restricted to tumour cells.

Bazzaman, sorry, have only just read your posts from last week. Was just about to say that I haven't posted here for a while and thought I'd check back and can't believe that it was as far back as 2013! It's not the busiest of boards, only had to go back 3 pages here to find that post lol! Thanks for the link and agree, cracking results and good to see the market recognising value here.

Angle have been shortlisted for the European Mediscience Awards in the Best Technology Award category. http://www.mediscience-event.co.uk/awards/shortlist/

Crumbs, yes, I wonder if people understood exactly what they were giving up and what they were gaining whether this Bill would have survived - fake news springs to mind. Am happy to explain more but don't want to clog up bb with OT stuff.

Not sure whether people realise that there was already a perfectly good, fully functioning and effective way for patients to receive unlicensed drugs on compassionate grounds - the FDA's expanded access policy. The FDA takes on average 4 days to respond to requests and approves 99% of applications. For urgent cases it can deal with applications via telephone and reach a decision within 24 hours. The Right to Try Bill cuts the FDA out of the process and appears to remove a whole level of protection from patients. Many see the Right to Try Bill as a backward step for patients and an attempt to reduce the power and authority of the FDA.

ah right so your oncologist thinks pharmaceutical companies are driven by greed.

Sorry, am not with you. Can't see why that means they're driven by greed but no matter.

The whole issue of the administration has been discussed previously in great detail. Redx today is a very different company from the one that went into administration and IMO it's time to look forward now. Some observations on the interims which hopefully will help with your question too:- 1) Iain Ross appears to have done a great job as Exec. Chariman, he has delivered �7m annualised reduction in costs, strengthened financial controls and accountabilities and put in place a strong and highly regarded management team to hand over to as he takes on the non-exec role. The change in culture to focus on realism and results is good to see. 2) Very disappointing that the RXC004 trial will not resume recruitment until early next year. 3) Despite point above, reassuring that the drug is hitting the target Wnt pathway with no off-target side effects and that the Company believe that the lower dose will satisfy the regulators who will allow the trial to resume. 4) Looks like they're going down the adoptive T cell therapy route with REDX08397 for intestinal fibrosis 5) Cash at end of March 2018 was �10.3m and halt on RXC004 trial will result in slower cash burn. The BOD state that this will take them through to mid 2019. Seems reasonable to assume that there shouldn't be any cash raise too far in advance of that date. 6) They have confirmed that they are currently in discussions with other parties re. potential partnerships/licensing agreements. Any deals obviously may negate/defer the need for any cash raise. 7) If I'm reading it correctly the subscription agreement with Lanstead was terminated when Redx went into administration and the remaining balance of �3.56m has been written off!! 8) No mention of the ongoing project with AstraZeneca

Seems a bit harsh Chelsea. Of course pharmas will be driven by the need to generate sales, revenue and profit. That means they're going to develop the drugs with the greatest chance of success which in turn surely benefits the patient?

Interesting comments from Roger Perlmutter that Merck will be focusing future efforts on combinations where each of the drugs has been proven to work separately as a �monotherapy� before testing them together. It reminded me of this paragraph making the exact same point from the SCIB1 research paper published in Oncotarget:- 'results demonstrate that it might be possible to rescue a poor vaccine and/or a non-responsive anti-PD-1 tumor by using a combination but then the survival is still very low. In contrast, our vaccine alone gives good survival and anti-PD-1 alone shows therapeutic efficacy in 50% of the animals (similar to results in melanoma patients) but the combination gives an overall survival of 80%. ' https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309713639_SCIB1_a_huIgG1_antibody_DNA_vaccination_combined_with_PD-1_blockade_induced_efficient_therapy_of_poorly_immunogenic_tumors

Wild - thanks for posting, agree it's a great article and well worth a read.

Courtesy of Waterloo on ADVFN, Northwestern University Chicago study centre is now recruiting for Parsortix breast cancer trial - primary completion date for trial scheduled for September. Good stuff.