Member Info for Bermudashorts

Johnny,

It could simply be that the standard of care CPI therapy for renal cancer patients is Ipilimumab plus nivolumab which makes recruitment of patients being treated with just a single CPI problematical. The logical step would be to run a cohort to patients being treated with doublet CPI therapy.

Corr - of not in

DIBS -

It's an RNS REACH. Not sure what you expect, are you suggesting that life sciences companies shouldn't communicate out publication in peer reviewed research papers?

TwoGood2Die

LDTs don't require FDA approval as long as the lab offering it is accredited.

Sangi.

The decision to stop using HyCEAD was announced just over 6 weeks after the closure of the Canadian office. Perhaps they were simply evaluating their options and other systems before making a decision?

Re. 4D Pharma. I disappeared from 4D because I had sold and therefore had no reason to post. As stated on the twitter group, I was concerned about funding by debt and the poor execution of the NASDAQ listing. 4D had a pipeline with real potential and it's a tragedy that it will never now be taken further. Early stage biotech and debt is a bad combination. Angle of course are debt free.

As for the patent application, it was only published on 23rd December and is now moving into the national phase of examination. Not sure how it's possible for it to have been granted - do you have a link?

Sangi,

That's not my experience at all. When I noticed the terminated study I received an explanation from the Company immediately. As for the HyCEAD system, you are mistaken and must have missed the RNS from Angle when they very clearly announced that they would stop using the system and why. This is taken from that RNS:-

'The decision has also been taken to focus development of downstream molecular analysis of Parsortix harvested cancer cells to third party platforms in preference to the Company's inhouse HyCEAD Ziplex platform. The latter had proved highly sensitive and successful in analysis of Parsortix liquid biopsy samples but required significant ongoing investment to enable the assay to be offered in a product format (as opposed to being limited to provision of a service from ANGLE clinical laboratories). Meanwhile, third-party molecular platforms have greatly improved in sensitivity and reduced in cost and now offer an installed base of molecular products already in the market, which can be leveraged for new Parsortix applications.'

Wow Sangi you're busy today.

There is no issue with Angle's prostate cancer study and it is unrelated to the study you mention in your 1351 post. As BOJO has posted, Angle's Domino study in prostate cancer has completed recruitment (100 patients) and samples are awaiting/undergoing analysis. The study record you have found is refers to a separate study in a more limited patient population that Solaris were interested in carrying out and has no connection to the Angle/Solaris collaboration.

Bantham...........and yet Greg Alexander remains Angle's biggest shareholder.

Sangi - looks like it

A new patent application from Angle was published on 21st December - WO2023241796 - CELL RECOVERY METHOD AND DEVICE:-

'a cell harvesting method and device for the efficient sedimentation and retention of cells from liquid samples onto a solid support with low cell losses and low impact on cell morphology'

Good to see Angle continuing to improve and protect their IP

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2023241796&_cid=P21-LR564F-96154-1

BOJO - Yes astonishing progress has been made in genomics and a useful video thanks. You may already have come across it, but if not have a look at research on the dark genome - mind blowing stuff and one to watch for the future!

BOJO

I think you're correct - my understanding is that Angle have developed an automated workflow that enables CTCs and ctDNA to be extracted from the same patient sample with Parsortix being linked in to the relevant NGS system. IMO this is absolutely the right commercial approach. There are tens of thousands of NGS systems already in use in labs across the globe and they are not going to move away from their installed systems. It's a much more attractive proposition to add a Parsortix machine and they will then be able to offer their patients/clients ctDNA and CTC analysis from the same blood draw. Angle will also be offering the same from their own labs.

I'm not sure many fully appreciate the significance of the RNS last week. We don't yet know what the future market for CTC liquid biopsies will look like because it simply doesn't exist at the moment. It's not a case of pinching a part of an existing market which is much easier to predict - it's an entirely new market. How that market evolves depends entirely on the sort of research announced by Angle last week which clearly demonstrates the utility of CTC analysis. In future, physicians prescribing a targeted therapy who may have been happy to rely on ctDNA may now also request a CTC liquid biopsy and labs may want to ensure they are able to provide that service.

I have read some really poor posts on the bbs over the last few days and the judgement call here isn't whether or not this resarch is important, it's whether you believe Angle can capitalise on it.

Ivy,

Worth remembering though that the redemption date for those CLNs is also next year. We have the prospect of Lindy touting a £30m to £60m raise and Redmile sitting on a mountain of stock due to the conversion of the CLNs. So it may well be that Redmile are the ones pushing for a NASDAQ listing. Having said that, I completely agree with your reservations and the old adage of be careful what you wish for very much applies IMO.

Matt,

It's always difficult to make judgement calls on these things and this is the perfect example of how we can all take away something different from the same set of words. I felt she was simply trying to manage expectations as she had previously done when discussing other potential glycan mAb deals. I believe she was trying to add some perspective and get across that the early stage milestones will be relatively modest in the context of a deal worth £600m. ie. don't expect the first milestone to be £75m! Hopefully we'll find out in the coming months.

By the way, I was one of those who disagreed with you regarding the terms of the deal. I thought it was a cracking deal given the stage of development and that the target is notoriously difficult. However, I'm genuinely sorry if you felt you were being 'slaughtered'. Not my intention at all.

Violindog - an odd way to discover that the strategy is to carry out a £30 to £60m raise next year. I can only hope that something was lost in translation and that it was a comment taken out of context but if this is indeed the case then I'm not sure this is the way to communicate it out -Shareholders deserve better IMO .

Matt - it's inconceivable that any licensing deal won't include early stage milestones. Most likely first triggers range from selecting a defined product or clinical trial approval for a phase 1 study through to recruitment of first patient to that trial. I think Lindy's comments at the AGM related to the amount involved and of course what constitutes a 'substantial payment' is very subjective. Even early milestones though should give a nice chunk of non-dilutive funding and we do know that Genmab have confirmed to Lindy that they intend to take SC129 into the clinic.

Excellent RNS and good to see a significant chunk of non-dilutive funding. From memory cash burn last year was around £15m and during this financial year C4x have now received just under £25m through milestones and sale of the Orexin-1 programme. The licensing agreement for the NRF2 Activator programme was signed just over a year ago and it's obviously performing well in preclinical development at AstraZeneca.

More importantly, today's RNS is great validation of C4x's ability to successfully develop small molecule drugs in the hot field of immuno/inflammatory diseases and bodes well for the rest of the pipeline. There are a handful of underappreciated UK bios quietly going about their business without resorting to they hype of others and way below the radar of most AIM investors. It's brilliant to see them progress.

Ruck ,

Sorry to read that you've been unwell and wishing you a speedy recovery.

Moonparty - correct. Think it would be somewhere in the region of 1.2 billion fully diluted although I haven't checked for the exact figure.

Yes, a very Merry Christmas. Safe travels if you have a journey and hope you all manage to enjoy a healthy and happy time with loved ones. Also remembering those who are no longer with us.

Cleanerworld,

Not an opinion, simply a statement of fact. The Texas Biomed. Institute is a not a commercial biopharma company, it's a not for profit research institute relying on grant and philanthropic funding.

Lindy was asked about the connection between Scancell and Texas Biomed. She gave a full and I believe honest answer. If there is more to it than that, she could easily have given a different answer without divulging anything that needed to remain confidential. It's up to each of us to decide whether or not we can take comments from our CEO given at the AGM at face value.

As for Covidity, afaik it shares IP with Avidimab and ImmunoBody and so there may be good strategic reasons why Scancell may decide to hold fire on licensing (assuming they could). If/when they do license they will want to make sure that the licenensee has the resources, experience, drive and strategy in place to take it all the way through clinical development and on to market. This is where I am offering an opinion (FWIW) - I don't believe Texas Biomedical is the home for Covidity. For now, Covidity brings to the table proof of concept for the ImmunoBody platform in infectious disease as well as early safety and efficacy data for Avidimab and that can only add to the attraction of the ImmunoBody platform.

Cleanerworld,

Just for clarity, that deal was with the German Merck which is a completely different company to the US Merck and has no connection to Keytruda/checkpoint inhibitors.