Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
Wigwammer,
The likelihood of success depends on a whole host of factors - there is no doubt that the Modi preclinical results have been fantastic and I suspect is the main reason most of us remain invested here. However, what evidence do you have that those preclinical results are more likely than others to be replicated at the same level and without any safety issues in humans? Because that's the argument you're making when you say that TD should use above average likelihood of success. When considering a reply, please assume as TD are that results of the phase I trial are still awaited.
This is a completely novel platform with untested targets and an unapproved novel adjuvant. TD can't look at other drugs that have already been through trials and have validated the target and mechanism for comparison. For example, If this were a mAB targeting PD-1 you may have a point - it's much easier to make a comparison and increase or decrease the chances of success based on preclinical data for an already proven therapy, with a known safety record and a proven target. Then add in the fact that Scancell have yet to take a drug beyond phase IIa trials and so have no track record of taking a drug to market.
This in no way diminishes the potential here or undermines the investment case - quite the opposite in fact. It means that there's huge potential, but as Scancell keep reminding us - data is needed to validate that potential. If it's good enough then TD's valuation will be revised upwards, but you won't be able to buy in at 18p.
This post isn't directed to you Ray, but as a general point, I think we're in danger of mixing the valuation and potential valuation here. The TD valuation is as of today - what TD believe Scancell are worth right now. That can only be based on current stage of development.
We are never going to agree on this one - we'll just get into another mouse data debate.
Until those phase I/II results are in, nobody knows, not even Scancell to what degree the unprecedented results in mice will be replicated in humans. The time to increase likelihood of success percentages is when those results are in, if appropriate.
Their view is that their valuation is cautious and conservative and leaves room for plenty of upside IF the promise shown in mice in the lab translates to humans in the clinic AND Scancell are able to either efficiently take the product through the long clinical development path or license to another party who have the ability, funds and desire to do the same.
Wigwammer,
I assume that's a rhetorical question - let me know if not.
Chelsea,
No problem with a difference in opinion Chelsea - these boards work best when we can discuss openly and amicably, but you're assuming the Trinity Delta report is only aimed at you/us.
There is a depressing lack of analyst coverage for the UK bio sector and the whole point of hiring Trinity Delta is to fill that void. The TD report is also aimed at potential investors and whilst we may already know much of what's in the report, anyone new to Scancell won't.
Sorry Chelsea but I think that's more than a little harsh. Not sure whether you've had a chance to actually read and digest the whole thing - if not then give it a go. There is new info. and the explanations of the products and where they sit in the market are excellent. More than that though it gives a balanced view and a good feel for how the land lies. Remember, this is paid for coverage - the underlying message will be from Scancell.
Ruck,
The report does state that they've taken a cautious approach and that their valuation is conservative - better over cautious than over hyped IMO.
As you know, the likelihood of success percentages are standard for the stage of development - the Genmab deal has no impact on that, the mAb licensed to Genmab is still preclinical and without a defined clinic ready product.
The Ichor shares have been factored in.
corr - well written.
A new update from Trinity Delta with revised valuation. Well worth a read - these Trinity Delta notes are informative and wel written and this one is no exception.
https://www.trinitydelta.org/research-notes/a-leader-in-antibody-and-vaccine-oncology-platforms/
Wild,
I think all we can take from this trial is that Avidimab and PharmaJet are validated for ongoing development of the oncology pipeline.
krafty-
As you know, this was a phase 1 trial assessing safety and immunogenicity. The trial wasn't designed or powered to look at efficacy in terms of preventing infection/reducing severity - to make any definitive claims on that front would require a massive trial involving thousands of patients.
Scancell would have been looking to see that both vaccines generated antibody and T cell responses to both targets and that they were safe.
The most important sentence from the whole RNS:-
'The success of a human trial demonstrating that an AvidiMab ® modified DNA vaccine, delivered via a needle free injection, can induce both T cell and antibody responses, with no safety concerns, is a pivotal proof point for Scancell's clinical strategy.'
Lochinvarlass,
What company are you referring to?
Chelsea
I thought long and hard about replying to your post last night as I'm sure you're absolutely right in saying that all were delighted to learn that Trish's tumour had shrunk. However, Trish herself has confirmed that she was horrified to learn that her comments had been taken and quoted on other platforms - we were responsible for causing her distress and anxiety and that can't be OK under any circumstances, no matter how good the intentions.
Ciaskin,
Yes possibly, although usually it would be a seamless transaction taking place as the deal is executed - ie. any outstanding options would automatically be exercised and the holders would receive a cash sum based on the takeover price per share less the exercise price - depending on the terms of the deal of course.
Riley,
Obviously when the share price is higher than the strike price common sense dictates that you wouldn't, unless you didn't have the cash to exercise the options or were concerned that you would be unable to sell them. Clearly neither of those scenarios apply in this case.
I was making the point that the news today is routine, there's no hidden meaning. and partners/collaborators exercising options before they expire is more or less neutral news (IMO)but then I think you probably understood that.
violindog -
True, but then that situation already existed with the tranche 2 options.
These options were granted to Ichor Medical systems over a decade ago in return for the use of their electroporation device. It's very common for tiny bios who don't have the funds to in-license vital technology to grant share options in lieu of hard cash payments. The Ichor device was an integral part of the development of the ImmunoBody platform and Scancell could not have taken SCIB1 into the clinic without it, but they didn't have the cash for a standard licensing agreement.
Worth noting the contribution the ImmunoBody platform has made to the growth of the Company and that the market cap at the time they granted the options was around £6m - I'd say a win/win situation and a pretty good deal for Scancell shareholders.
Chester,
Why now? I expect because it's got to the top of Ichor's finance officer's to do list.
As for the drop in SP today - I hope it's not down to retail investors panic selling on the back of the RNS. If so, then they really don't understand share options and the role they play in early biotech. If Ichor had let the options expire it would have been understandable, but this is just routine stufff.