Member Info for Bermudashorts

Hopester,

Thanks for the clarification and I understand the points you were making.

Hopester,

In what way can Parsortix be disruptive to Abbott or any other medtech companies? Isn't the whole beauty of Angle's business model is that their tech is complementary and not disruptive to existing offerings? Abbott is a perfect example - current estimates are that the ability to use a CTC liquid biopsy would lead to a four-fold increase in HER2 testing volumes.

Having said that, you raise a valid point regarding exclusivity and it will be interesting to see which way Angle go with their first deals. Will they offer exclusive co-development deals for specific assays/targets such as PD-L1 or HER2 thereby retaining some element of control over the development path or are they happy to offer non-exclusive deals?

Finally, I'm surprised that you feel there's a lack of activity - it may not all be headline grabbing stuff but yesterday we learned that Angle have:-
- completed development of the bespoke assay for their pharma client to use in clinical trials
- completed the ovarian verification study and produced excellent results
- developed and launched to market a new pap stain assay
- following the Solaris partnership deal, have set up and are running a prostate cancer clinical trial
- have appointed consultants to secure reimbursement codes
- entered into discussions with over 20 pharmas and biotechs., as well as medtech companies and governement bodies
- selected and are negotiating deals with distributors for other geographical territories

............and that's just the stuff we know about. It seems that there's a huge amount of activity going on and BOJO's 'working tirelessly' description is entirely appropriate. IMO of course.

Yep, ditto - interesting to hear your thoughts, thanks.

From my (very limited) understanding, some points worth highlighting from both abstracts are below. Again, it would be great if Burble could confirm or correct as appropriate.

The first abstract concerns Avidimab. So far we have seen preclinical data from Scancell's own glycan mAbs which have been enhanced with Avidimab. However, Scancell have told us that Avidimab could potentially be used to enhance any mAb, and afaik, this abstract provides the first preclinical evidence of this. They have taken CD40 targeting mAbs and compared the performance of the Avidimab enhanced versus non-Avidimab versions. Lindy gives a brief description of CD40 in the RNS and it's been the subject of a huge amount of research so plenty of information out there if you want to read up on it. For now though, the important information is that the Avidimab version demonstrated improved binding and B cell expansion compared to the non-enhanced mAb - ie. the Avidimab mAb outperformed the standard mAb.

The second abstract seems to be a summary of each glycan mAb and without going back over previously published research, it's hard to say what's new. However, you can see that SC129 seems to be the most advanced of the lot and they've clearly been pushing on with the development of this mAb as an ADC. The abstract mentions auristatin E and maytansinoids - drugs that must be linked to mAbs to form ADCs as they are too toxic to be delivered on their own. We have confirmation here that SC129 has successfully been conjugated with both.

Will be interesting to see the full poster presentations.

Lofas/Friggs

Friggs, I notice your post yesterday seems have got a bit lost, so hopefully the following might help answer your question and also some of Lofa's points.

Firstly, I think it's important to understand that this was a scientific conference (as opposed to investment conference) and the whole purpose is to share data with other scientists in order to advance learning and underestanding. EuroMAbNet is a network of companies/labs who are linked to academic institutions and working in the field of antibody development, validation and production, so very specialised with highly complex chemistry. The presentions are obviously pitched at the level of the audience and won't mean a tremendous amount on first reading to the average AIM investor.

Secondly, it may be worth just going over how things work at these conferences, hopefully Burble will be able to correct/add, but so far all we've seen are the abstracts. These are simply short summaries of the poster presentations to be made at the conference. Whilst rules will vary from conference to conference, abstracts have to be submitted well in advance of the conference, in this case, the deadline was 24th June. Abstracts are then screened (not to be confused with peer review) and accepted (or otherwise) for presentation at the conference. The more detailed research is then presented - literally on a giant poster at the conference. Most conferences will insist that posters contain new, previously unpublished research and the contents are usually embargoed until after the presentation has been made. This is why we've only seen the abstracts, but will see the full posters when any embargo has been lifted and they've been uploaded to Scancell's website.

I'm not sure who exactly was presenting, but it's highly unlikely to have been Lindy herself. The conference ended yesterday, so hopefully the posters will appear on Scancell's website shortly and we can discuss in more detail, but I'll try to summarise what we know so far in a separate post later.

Konar,

The grant from the Headcase Cancer Trust was for a project looking at the HAGE and TRP2 antigens and was probably completed years ago. This research is using the existing SCIB1 melanoma vaccine which as you know targets TRP2 and gp100 antigens. I'm not sure who has funded the research, but it's origins certainly lie in the original collaboration funded by the Headcase Cancer Trust.

I've just tweeted a link to another abstract for a poster being presented at the Immunotherapy of Cancer Conference in Munich. This is also new preclinical research, looking at the existing SCIB1 vaccine in brain tumours. This research was carried out in collaboration with scientists from Nottingham Trent University who I believe will be actually presenting the poster. From the conclusion:-

'Combinatorial SCIB1 and anti-PD-1 therapy represents an exciting therapeutic intervention for the treatment of intracranial tumours.'

https://www.itoc-conference.eu/

The link in the Proactive article takes you to the publications page of Scancell's website, but it hasn't yet been updated with the new posters, so all you'll see are old publications/posters.

To see the new abstracts you need to follow Ciaskin's route (thanks Ciaskin) - ie. download the abstract book from the conference's website.

Redx have been selected for the shortlist for the Scrip Awards Biotech Company of the Year - they face stiff competition from Moderna, but what a fantastic achievement for a small AIM bio to be shortlisted. The Scrip Awards have been running for 18 years and cover global pharma, looking for the best innovations and advances each year.

https://pharmaintelligence.informa.com/scripAwards2022?src=social&account_type=TWITTER&account_name=PharmaScrip&utm_campaign=Scrip+Awards&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&linkId=182535615

Well done Redx.

OK thanks, I'll email myself then, only LD is still showing on UoN website as a member of staff and she is on the agenda for a conference in November representing the University with no mention of Scancell - it's a mystery!

rats,

Did Scancell ever reply to your email in August enquiring about Lindy Durrant's status?

Some good coverage here for Angle:-

https://www.insideprecisionmedicine.com/topics/oncology/ovarian-cancer/rna-based-algorithm-successfully-predicts-ovarian-cancers-in-pelvic-mass/

Konar/Ciaskin

I don't think it will have any impact on the existing trial. At some stage it would be good to see a combination trial comparing performance in both the adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting, but not sure how likely that is.

The next move for SCIB1 will be interesting - if they do decide to run a larger study in any setting then I assume/hope they will move forward with iSCIB1+ rather than SCIB1. If you have an enhanced product with longer IP protection which also would recruit from a much wider patient population then why wouldn't you?

Guess it all depends on the data coming from both the current SCIB1 and the Covidity trial - both of which would inform the design of any future studies.

Sorry for the long post here, but not sure whether any of you have been keeping an eye on ESMO which ended yesterday. Results from a study comparing Keytruda in the adjuvant versus neoadjuvant setting have caused quite a stir and may ultimately be practice changing. The study showed that patients given Keytruda as a neoadjuvant therapy had significantly lower risk of their cancer returning than those given it as an adjuvant therapy.

For any who may not be aware, there are 3 basic settings for melanoma clinical trials:-

Neoadjuvant - a treatment given before patients undergo surgery to remove their tumours
Adjuvant - given after surgery to patients with a high risk of recurrence (often referred to as resected patients)
Advanced/non-resectable - patients with inoperable/ advanced disease and tumours in situ

The current SCIB1 combination trial is being run in patients with advanced/inoperable melanma, but the original intended setting for SCIB1 was as an adjuvant therapy . Indeed, you'll see that Scancell's website focuses on these patients with results from the original SCIB1 trial, swimmer plot etc.

It's well worth a read of the link below which summarises the ESMO presentation and highlights the vital role played by T cells. You can see why the original SCIB1 trial was so successful for these resected patients - generating potent T cells hunting down and mopping up any micro metastases left behind. Would be wonderful one day to see how it performs in combination with Keytruda in that setting.

https://www.mdanderson.org/newsroom/neoadjuvant-immunotherapy-improves-outlook-in-high-risk-melanoma.h00-159542901.html?cmpid=twitter

Ivy,

Regarding Robert Miller - his name and telephone no. is given as the contact point for both the Modi1 and Covidity trials on clinicaltrials.gov so assume he's playing a fairly active role in the running of both trials.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05329532?term=scancell&draw=2&rank=1

Crumbs,

Yes, exactly so.

If Lindy Durrant has left UoN, it would have been so much better if Scancell had informed their shareholders that their CEO and CSO had switched to a full time role and confirmed their intentions to continue to operate out of their labs in the Biodiscovery Institute at the University. Instead we have discovered her change of status via the contents of a private email from LD being posted on advfn and had to draw conclusions from bits of information found by posters on this bb. Am hoping this will be cleared up once and for all in the Annual Report or at the AGM.

Lindy Durrant is still showing as Professor of Cancer Immunotherapy on the UoN website, if previous information is correct, I assume the website will be updated at the start of the new academic year and she will be awarded emeritus status in due course.

Ray - posts crossed :)

Dracula -

It's a joke, Scancell currently has 2 labs. One based in Nottingham focused on research and discovery and another brand new state of the art lab in Oxford Science Park focusing on developing the products, designing, setting up and running clinical trials. A real bio, discovering and developing its own IP.

Chelsea,

I'm surprised at your reply and think it's best to leave it there - we both know the score.

Chelsea,

Perhaps it's because he alternates between holding long and strong and trashing the company to suit his trading position.