Member Info for Bermudashorts

Lofas - the RNS today has no impact on Scancell's IP. Scancell retains 100% ownership of all Moditope IP. The RNS doesn't state it, but I assume the agreement with Vaccitech is for a non-exclusive licence of their SNAPvax technology. Scancell are effectively paying to use Vaccitech's IP but Vaccitech retain ownership and can continue to develop and license out to others.

Interesting, SNAPvax was developed by a company called Avidea which was founded by scientists from the National Institutes of Health in the US. Vaccitech acquired the technology when it bought Avidea just under a year ago. Avidea's website gives much more detail and is worth a read. It seems that SNAPvax is a neat way of overcoming the formulation issues caused by hydrophobic peptides.

Worth noting this sentence from Vaccitech's website:-

'Synthetic platform may increase breadth of targets for the immune system, such as post-translationally modified antigens inaccessible to RNA and viral vaccine'

I'm assuming that as Scancell will be using SNAPvax for Modi2 that they won't be using Amplivant, but would be interested to hear what others think and look forward to hearing Burble's take on it later.

https://www.avideatechnologies.com/snapvax/

https://investors.vaccitech.co.uk/news-and-events/news-releases/news-release-details/vaccitech-acquires-avidea-technologies-expand

Interesting, Vaccitech of course is the Sarah Gilbert and Adrian Hill spin out from Oxford University.

Good to see progress on Modi2 and that Scancell have taken action to avoid the manufacturing delays seen with Modi1.

Well spotted Konar, thanks for sharing

ha ha - have just noticed that lse has automatically blanked out 'h o m o' from ****citrullination

Sofasurfer,

AFAIK Scancell haven't specified the cancers yet, but various research papers have mentioned colorectal, pancreatic, liver, kidney and thyroid cancers so they may target one or more of those. However Scancell have confirmed that they will be aiming for tumours with a particularly immunosuppressive environment.

The tumour microenvironment is made up of a whole host of immunosuppresive cells. Myeloid-derived suppressive cells (MDSCs) are one of the most potent type. As tumours grow, levels of MDSCs can increase enormously and suppress the immune response to the tumour. They are known to be associated with tumour growth, metastatic spread and resistance to treatment. Whilst others are developing therapies attempting to target and block MDSCs, Modi-2 actually exploits their presence. MDSCs produce an enzyme called MPO which is responsible for driving ****citrullination which in turn generates the targets for Modi-2 - clever stuff.

This is why Modi-2 may well be particularly effective in tumours with a highly immunosuppressive environment and explains why many other treatments fail in these types of cancers.

We've discussed naming systems for new drugs on here before - where stem words are allocated to different classes of drugs. So anti-virals all end with the stem 'vir' - eg. Remdesivir and monoclonal antibodies all end with the stem 'mab' - eg. Pembrolizumab (Keytruda). etc. etc.

Apparently there have been so many new mAbs that it's becoming difficult to name them and during the year the WHO have introduced a new nomenclature scheme - there will be no more mabs. Instead new monoclonal antibodies will be divided into 4 categories - tug, bart, mig and ment. Sounds like characters from Teletubbies:) Link below explains the criteria for each category. If any of Scancell's glycan mAbs are taken to market, wonder whether it'll be as a bart or a mig? For sure though, it won't be a mab.

https://www.antibodysociety.org/international-non-proprietary-names/who-retires-mab-suffix/

1) The SCIB1 patient chose to appear on BBC to promote the Southampton clinical trials centre - he knew his story would be broadcast nationally and was happy to participate. He was also appearing alongside an expert to guide him (can''t remember his name - might have been Prof. Stern)
2) That is not the same as the lady who decided to share her story on the Macmillan head and neck cancer forum - a place where cancer patients go to share very personal details regarding their disease and treatment. She obviously would have known it was a public forum, but couldn't possibly have anticipated that her story and medical history would be re-posted and discussed in great detail on stock bulletin boards and twitter. She may be perfectly happy with that, but then again she may not. If she's not, then we are possibly causing her distress at a time when she really doesn't need it. On the other hand we may not be, but the point is we don't know and so why would you take the chance? What a shame it would be if she stopped posting.

As the trial progresses and if we continue to see these responses, one of the study investigators may do a press release featuring one of the patients, as Christies did recently with a Redx patient, but that would be their choice and that's the time to post and tweet it out far and wide IMO.

I can imagine the response this post will receive elsewhere and I understand that others won't agree. This is one of those situations where we each have to decide for oursleves.

Burble,

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to explain in layman's terms - I'm sure it's appreciated by all.

CC thanks for that reminder.

Also Scancell are presenting a poster at SITC22 in Boston next week:-

'Citrullinated glucose-regulated protein 78 is a novel candidate target for cancer immunotherapy' - Novel Single-Agent Immunotherapies

https://www.sitcancer.org/2022/home

TF,

Then they'll have a good indication that Modi1 can be used as a monotherapy in head and neck cancer and doesn't need a CPI.

I completely agree, unless the falsedawn has asked for permission to repost it.

I'm sure this must already have been posted and I've just missed it, but good to see The Times covering the Genmab deal last week:-

Scancell in breakthrough deal

Scancell Holdings shares rose to their highest level in more than four months after the drugs maker bagged a licensing agreement with Genmab, the Danish biotechnology giant.

Genmab now has exclusive rights to develop and commercialise Scancell’s investigational anti-glycan monoclonal antibody in multiple products. Under the terms of deal, Scancell will receive an undisclosed, up-front payment and will be eligible for milestone payments of up to $208 million for each product that is developed. A potential payment of $624 million could be paid if Genmab develops and commercialises products across all “defined modalities”.

The Nottingham-based, Aim-listed group also will receive “low-single-digit royalties” on net sales of all commercialised products.

Lindy Durrant, 65, Scancell’s chief executive, said the agreement provided “strong validation” for its GlyMab platform, which generates high-affinity, anti-glycan monoclonal antibodies.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/urban-logistics-is-the-right-choice-suggests-liberum-h0c5tbg3b

TakeStock,

It may not have been Scancell's decision to make - Genmab may have insisted on confidentiality. I honestly don't think you can make any judgement calls about the size of the upfront payment based on the fact that it hasn't been disclosed. However, the early preclinical stage of the deal does give some indication and whilst I don't agree the amount is negligible, I think we probably do all agree that a single upfront payment is unlikely to meet all of Scancell's funding needs given the ongoing level of development at Scancell.

So that brings us to the timing of the milestone payments attached to this deal. Obviously Scancell have no control over how quickly Genamab will develop this mAb or how many resources they'll allocate and we don't know the milestone triggers,. Just to give some indication, I have listed early trigger points for milestone payments for other bios with preclinical licensing deals that I have been invested in over the years.

1) Selection of a defined product for clinical development -
2) FDA clearance of an IND
3) Commencement of phase I trials
4) Completion of phase I trials

There's also the potential for new deals on other mAbs or Covidity, but IMO it's impossible for any of us to make any sort of informed judgement call on the timing. We also shouldn't forget that Scancell have themselves licensed in tech. including Amplivant for Moditope and it may be that as the Modi1 trial progresses they will themselves have to pay milestones to Isa Pharmaceuticals.

So it's possible that Scancell will carry out another funding round at some stage over the next couple of years, but that's part and parcel of biotech investing and we have seen the tremendous difference that funding from Vulpes and Redmile has made to Scancell. If the Moditope trial continues as it has started and with a Genmab deal in the bag, this will be an opportunity to bring in other specialist funds and to broaden their base of institutional holders. Hopefully Scancell wil clarify the position at the AGM.

Konar,

You are correct, the trial protocol will specify a set dosing regime, it's not something that's worked out as they go along, although of course the data from this study will inform the design of future studies. The last time we were given any details on dosing was back in 2019 when patients were to be dosed at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 weeks and thereafter at 12 weekly intervals. There have been changes in design and a trial protocol amendment since then so that may have changed. I do know for sure that the dosing period is up to 2 years for those who respond.

Perhaps a question for the AGM.

moonparty,

It may well be that cohort 1 will be switched to the higher dose.

moonparty,

Cohort 2 are receiving the full higher dose of 2 vimentin and 1 enolase peptides.

But the point is that this is the response from the first scan from the first patient to receive the full dose and we know they weren't dosed until mid August . We obviously shouldn't expect such a spectacular response in every patient and we don't yet know whether the response will be maintained, but there again we don't know whether it will increase either.

Rob23460 - your post has got slighly lost, but thanks for highlighting what's really important here and taking a moment to think of the people behind this news. I know I've said this before, but honestly it's a huge thing to take part in a clinical trial, especially when you are so poorly.

Lofas,

I believe a partial response generally means that the tumour has shrunk by at least a third, but don't quote me on that - would need Scancell to confirm.

botski,

Yes a partal response is a reduction in the size of the tumour due to treatment.