Member Info for Bermudashorts

WTP

Firstly, fantastic news from Moderna today and very much reinforces the results from BioNTech - the spike protein is a good target and mRNA vaccines may well become the new hot area in the biotech/pharma world.

Regarding your various comments about the AZN vaccine. It's way too early to start talking about backing the wrong horse, perhaps better to wait for the results. Ultimately we need as many of these 1st gen. vaccines to work as possible and given the validation of the spike protein as a target, it's highly likely that there will be other successes. I think most would celebrate if the AZN vaccine were one of them - at under £2.50 per shot, it's probably the cheapest and plans are already in place to ensure the poorest nations can receive the vaccine.

I think it's insulting to Scancell for you to describe the UKRI funding as paltry. They would have applied for what they needed for preclinical development and their application would have been submitted with a fully costed budget. Their application had to be reviewed and approved by an independent panel of experts and the fact that Scancell have received such a large sum is a sign of the quality of the science. Your comparison to the Oxford vaccine simply reinforces my point. At the same stage, they also received £2m.

WTP

From your previous post:-

'the timing of the announcement and it's format seemed a bit off to me too.'

So very easy to throw these sorts of comments around. Can you explain precisely why you think the timing and format was off?

'I think LD 's rather nervous appearance is due to the fact that she know something that she can"t tell us and dosent like keeping secrets..'

lol - possibly the best ramp we've had on this bb since the days of someone spotting a twinkle in LD's eye.

The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna both use lipid nanoparticles as a delivery system. Although the mRNA is in itself unstable, it's the lipid nanoparticles that are really sensitive to heat and they're the reason why these vaccines need to be stored at such cold temperatures. To keep LNPs stable, you have to basically stop them moving and this is only achieved at very low temperatures - if it's not cold enough then the LNPs will just degrade. I think Moderna's vax lasts for 14 days and BioNTech's for 5 days in a fridge once defrosted.

I assume this explains why Scancell have decided not to go with the LNP delivery system used for SCIB2 and instead will go with a peptide system. I wish LD had spent more time in her AGM presentation explaining the advantages Covidity brings - I think it would have helped some to understand the need for second generation vaccines.

Chelsea,

Regarding your 19.28, I think we have to be careful to separate the medical ethics of BioNTech/Pfizer's announcement from the market reaction.

The statement from both companies is no different from Scancell issuing an RNS with an update on clinical trial results - you wouldn't expect Scancell to submit their results for peer review and you wouldn't question the content or the ethics of releasing the data. The reality is that these results have been generated from an interim review carried out by a completely independent data monitoring committee. It's all as it should be.

The news from this trial is fantastic - much better than any of the experts predicted and the speed of development is just staggering. What a fantastic achievement for all involved. It gives the first glimmer of hope of a return to some sort of normality in a world crippled by this pandemic so the media interest is unavoidable. Of course, there's a way to go yet and anything could still happen.

We always knew Covidity would be a second generation vaccine and let's face it, there will be plenty of areas for improvement with the BioNTech vax - not least stability/storage/transport/dosing frequency etc. The fact that we seem to be looking at a much more effective 1st generation vax than predicted, in no way negates the need for a 2nd generation one.

botski,

I believe the Paul Ehrlich Institut is widely recognised as the leading vaccine specialist in the World and so would be a good place to start with advisory meetings when planning clinical trials.

Wild

Thanks - had completely forgotten that happened. Guess the Ichor device is as much on trial as SCIB1 and certainly the FDA will want to ensure that they have hard data in front of them to demonstrate consistency and accuracy of delivery.

Wild,

No must have completely forgotten that, do you have a link?

Wild,

Is the Ichor device faulty?

Burble,

With respect, Scancell have already clearly laid out their strategy (with timelines) over and over again. The problem hasn't been the communication of the timelines - it's been hitting them.

For the first time Lindy Durrant should be able to develop the pipeline without being hampered by lack of funds, without having to scale back trials and without having to leave promising IP on the shelf because they don't have the resources to take it further. Also for the first time, there is a deadline that they must stick to. Real product development and commercial progress MUST be made within 2 years because Scancell now have just under £20m of debt to be repaid.

These two factors should combine to drive Scancell forwards with a far greater impetus than we have seen to date.

Bronxville,
Bronxville,
I'm not sure what you think is missing/incorrect or why you think it's shoddy and lazy. The record was updated to show that the trial is no longer recruiting and it will now just stay active. At the end of the 90 day randomised part of the trial, placebo patients are moved across to be treated with Filsuvez and then all patients can continue for up to 2 years on treatment. Of course, we won't know the impact of Covid-19 on the follow-up part of the trial but for now, as far as I can see, the clinical trial record is absolutely correct.

Dalester,

I seem to remember several years ago, Richard Goodfellow advised that for an oncology trial, the cost per patient was around £100K. I expect it's now higher,

Chelsea,

Have just read your question to me in your 18.20.

Just to be clear, I didn't say that I thought Vulpes' position wasn't untenable, it may well be. I just said that it's too early to make that assumption IMO. That's simply because we have no real idea of the reasons behind their actions, nor do we know what's going on behind the scenes or what conversations are taking place. I just think it might be better to wait and see how this plays out. Funny, not so long ago they were our saviours .

Depending on what posts you're reading we either have Vulpes as the bad boys who apparently are only after cheaper fundings or Redmile who are after World domination and are going to make a start by frightening away all of Scancell's shareholders to acquire the Company on the cheap.

Of course the truth of the matter is that none of us can possibly know the full facts. I don't believe Vulpes are after cheap and frequent fundings, after all they'd simply be diluting themselves. In fact they're probably more worried about the fact that they'll be diluted by Redmile. I'm sure they have perfectly legitimate concerns and I think we all wish we understood a little more about exactly what they are. I also don't believe Redmile's have some sinister ulterior motive.

Despite the calls for more information, Scancell have clearly laid out their position and explained why they believe these funds are important. I'm not sure it's realistic to expect a budgeted forecast and it's not their place to tell us what Vulpes issues are. Only Vulpes can do that and they have chosen not to. So we just have to make our own minds up based on what we know and remembering that it's not a cases of good fund/bad fund, it's simply deciding which route offers the best balance between chances of success and risk.

IMO

Dalester/LL

The data for your link is taken from Redmile's 13F SEC filings so only includes US listed companies and won't include any listed in the UK. Also worth noting they're only filed quarterly so those holdings will be from June.

I don't think that link works but you can google him if you're interested.

This gives more detail and it's clear Redx were heading for administration (again!)

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/biotech-firm-redx-in-takeover-talks-with-disgraced-us-pharma-boss-sam-waksal-tccgftsdv

Just to answer the specific quesiton about Yesod.

Yesod did indeed make an offer which was rejected and by the time the second offer came along, Redmile had already become involved and the second offer was rejected . It's worth having a look at Yesod which was set up by Sam Waskal - see here:-
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1903155_1903156_1903172,00.html

Of course Redmile are motivated by profit. but I can't see any evidence so far that they're an aggressive predator. They haven't forced Redx to delist and nobody was forced to sell their shares. Those who were brave enough to hold have done very well as have Redmile.

Bermudashorts - 12 Oct 2020 - 16:04:54 - 32866 of 33670 Using immunology to fight cancer. - SCLP
DC

I have been invested in Redx on and off and so know the company and its history well. The circumstances that led to Redmile's offer for Redx were unique and quite different from the situation Scancell are in. Suffice to say that Redx had been in and out of administration, had been forced to sell its lead candidate at bargain basement prices and were struggling to secure funding. They also had a major shareholder, John Moulton who wanted out. Against that backdrop they had great science and a very highly regarded CEO.

Redmile became involved with a small equity placing, a short term loan and CLNs but it was the purchase of John Moulton's stock (39.5% of the company)which took them above the 30% threshold and triggered rule 9 of the Takeover Code thereby forcing a mandatory offer. This action was backed by the BOD and worth noting that the offer was for 15.5p but the SP at the time had fallen to around 5p and the market cap was under £9m - a sorry state of affairs and you can imagine what the outcome would have been if John Moulton had tried to sell his stock on the open market. So Redmile found themselves owning over 30% of a company. However, this was a function of the very low market cap and the fact that it simply wasn't possible to provide the funding and stability the Company needed without going over the 30% threshold.

Since then, as we know Redx have gone on to sign a licensing deal with AstraZeneca and another deal with Jazz Pharmaceuticals and the share price is around 70p. A perfect example of Redmile's investment strategy in action. They look at fundamentals and try to spot trends or events ahead of the market. They have a deep understanding of biotech and are prepared to fund companies to ensure they are able to fulfil their potential.

Redmile are a multi billion $ investment fund, their motivation is profit and they'll be looking for an exit with all their invesments - they're not interested in acquiring and running biotechs, it's not what they're about and that's why Redx remains listed on AIM despite the fact that Redmile own 90% of the stock.

All IMO of course.

Bill -

I'll copy across a post I made a few weeks ago on advfn which may put a different light on things.

We can speculate all day long about Vulpes and Redmiles motives and I'm not sure it takes us any further.

Regarding Vulpes, it's far too early to say that their position is untenable and that they'll offload their stock. I know there's been the suggestion that this is already a done deal and the buyer is waiting in the wings but we have no idea what conversations are taking place at the moment or what twists and turns are to come. Vulpes have a responsibility to their clients and their primary consideration will be protecting their investment and profit - they're long on 133m shares.

Redmile - have seen lots of claims about Redmile's intentions but I think most of these overestimate Scancell's importance to them. They're a $6 billion fund - they're invested at any one time in 80 to 100 stocks. I can't see any evidence that their motives here are control or to take over Scancell or that they have any intention of collecting biotech companies. Of course there's risk in having a major investor with such a large potential holding but they already hold enough with their CLNs to trigger a mandatory offer. They bought that stock at 5.5p and so any mandatory offer would only need to be made at that level. If they wanted to take control then why would they go on and buy more at 13P, thereby upping the price?

Redx's CEO, Lisa Anson was presenting last night at a Proactive one2one . With Scancell's shareholders in mind, Timbo very kindly asked her about the potential threat from Redmile and their intentions. You can listen to her reply via the link below and make your own minds up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGGRadLPLqs

Konar,

I believe the opposite is true.

Without significant investment, Scancell will continue to be hampered by lack of funds. They raised £15m but their cash burn without any products in trial is around £7 to £8m. If they really want to speed things up, they have to be able to recruit the resources they need and to run more than one trial at a time. Most importantly of all, they need to be able to run a sufficiently powered Modi1 trial and if that requires 100 patients then they need to be able to fund it. I would hate to see the Modi1 trial scaled back in the same way as SCIB1.

So whilst there are perfectly valid concerns about the debt that Scancell is taking on, this raise is all about speeding up results, not slowing them down. IMO of course.