Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Thanks RR,
Your answer has helped me keep focused on the basic objective.
As a non scientist it is the questions beyond the fact that T cells are present in the tumor that I simply cannot imagine, but I am trying to do so. So forgive me as I can only express myself metaphorically. The way I see it is that the scene of the battle is the tumor, so what are the scientist looking for beyond that both the cancer and the T cells (each type) are present? Are they able to measure the strength of the T cells somehow? Is there a scale that can be used? Beyond that a dead tumor tissue with T cells present would be very conclusive evidence wouldn't it?
I seem to get the impression from LD latest presentation that results for this may be available soon. Unless I have missed something this is still going ahead in SCCHN? I know people are really interested to see proof of T cell activity in the tumor. As Lindy says, this is what pharma are looking for...
I wonder if anybody can explain what is the significance of finding T cells in the tumor apart from the obvious. Why would pharma find this compelling?
Many Thanks
Not seen it yet but if someone can post a link when it becomes available.
Meanwhile thanks for feedback and thoughts which have been very helpful.
Not sure if this has been posted but I have a feeling it may have been posted in the last week. Anyway a very interesting read re presentation and summary of facts:
https://www.scancell.co.uk/Data/Sites/1/media/fininfo/2024/scancell-interim-results-fy-2024.pdf
Burble,
Targeting/testing/analyses also seems to lean one particular way that of ctDNA rather than the burgeoning CTC's (which offer DNA, RNA, and protein analyses). Development takes place as it does and it will always be in favour of one than the other. It would take a lot to switch focus. Especially with the long development time lines of drugs so it is difficult to see how one can just switch focus to DNA. Unless, of course big pharma is so interested in Scancell's work and they have no conflicting interest so that switching simply is not an issue? They could be tempted to steel a march. I would be interested to know, do big pharma adopt innovative drug candidates that are not inline with the current way of thinking so easily?
However we have to remember of course that there is an overlap with Scancells work involving checkpoint inhibitors. Many more no doubt too. So it is not too far out afterall?
Yes and the UK labs are operational under the Good Medical Practice scheme. Still need real validation but good to see them being utilised. Everything with P is complex as it begins to penetrate the market which gives TGTD and Co good purchase critically but the only people persuaded by them would be under researched or none researched investors. You do not need good scientific knowledge - either in general or specific terms to eviscerate the derampers arguments , but in doing so publically you end up educating those that cannot be bothered to work things out for themselves. Especially of knowledge garnered from the much valued TeleG group. Hence why I do not engage with them on the whole.
Let them remain in the dark of the one sided echo chamber.
ATB
It means the allocation of shares are listed in a block rather than as and when as they happen. Means less RNS's for the same thing
HI Davey,
Good post. The only other one you missed was when it jumped from 11p to 28p last year! This just underlines your point. With expected news flow it is plausible to suggest that it may move upwards again in an equally significant way?
ATB