Member Info for BOJO2020

Violin Dog,

How terrible for you that your confidence and views seem so inextricably linked to the whimsical ways of the share price…

Hi Bantham,

The US debt ceiling still not resolved…

Wood for the trees comes to mind.

ATB

Hi TF & WTP,

It is mainly Scancell department leaders and staff, even including a student. I suppose it underlines the size and breadth of Scancell now and that people are proud of what they are doing and supportive of one another.

Do we not think that the recent local article to Clatterbridge and the Scancell video are simply part of the patient recruitment drive. After all, recruitment is one of, if not the biggest challenge to a successful trial (see COVIDITY). I for one am glad to see Scancell and the CIO doing a thorough job in this respect with ModiFY.

Bermuda

Happy with your explanation. Many thanks. It is important to understand how these things should work and in which order.

C11/Berm

I wonder if Prof Ottensmeier has more autonomy to talk about the trial as Chief Investigator. He is not employed by Scancell and I would certainly think that he is not bound by AIM or market regulations. Unless his comments are being used as we have seen in a Scancell RNS. Clearly that would need to pass muster with Nomad etc.

So what rules is he bound too? And might we expect something from ASCO. I would remind everybody that Lindy basically gave a pretty clear heads up at the AGM several months prior to official news.

Highly speculative question I know. But a very valid point for discussion I believe...

So this begs the question, as he is Chief Investigator. What is he bound to say or not say. We know that if he is communicating as part of a Scancell RNS then what he say's

Cant see Newmont getting involved in anything shady... They have the money to sort things properly.

Conspiracy theories best kept for Eastenders and Corrie

IMO

Twiggy has a reputation for buying cheap assets. Question is, does that benefit those who bought here around 7 to 9p in the short, medium, or long term? If he 'assists,' with any growth purchase. Do not see how that correlates with other shareholders interests.

Hi,

Thanks WTP for finding this article and posting. Personally I found it heart warming and encouraging and it was an excellent start to my BH weekend. I had a large smile on my face as I read it. Scancell must be proud.

For me, I think the Clatterbridge centre have enabled Trish to take control of, ‘her story.’ That would have been one of the main motivating factors for going to a local newspaper. We did intrude but that is done. Trish has used her own words and that is appropriate IMO.

It just underlines to anybody that could not quite believe this is happening. Well it is!!

Dan re point 1. It is highly unlikely that a second tissue biopsy for the following reasons:

1. Cost
2. Risk of infection
3. The tumor may have been removed
4. The cancer may have changed in between biopsies
5. The clinician may have decided to remove all of the tumour first time round.

A CTC liquid biopsy can be repeated

Thanks TF,

I count SCOPE as effectively still in prep as it appears iSCIB1+ has more potential than the promising SCIB1. Interesting that we can only compare the former preclinical to the latter, a clinically tested sibling! My post was prompted by your question re: ModiFY recruitment. As we know AvidiMab should open up eligibility for SCOPE and therefore once the amended trial is under way, recruitment should be less of an issue.

Once we are on the right track we will get where we are going. Fingers crossed it is worth the journey.

ATB

TF,

It does look like recruitment is going well for ModiFY.

When it comes to the Scope trial, Scancell will hopefully get the nod for iSCIB1+! That will certainly remove a significant hurdle of recruitment... So would that mean a significant change to the trial protocol, hence the delay. Delay is fine by the way! Better do it properly IMO.

ATB

Need more questions than the interims… even if Angle chose them it would be interesting

Candlestick,

Hilarious! Really made me laugh for some reason. Butt, EC makes a good point.

ATB

AB,

We have optimists and pessimists views and many in between on this forum. A pessimist may see a balanced/objective view as over optimistic. An optimist may see a pessimist as unrealistically negative. A balanced view can see both sides but is accused of sitting on the fence. Anyway, a lot of strings are pulled by such semantics.

The original question you ask, "What if the results garnered so far aren't quite as stunning as hoped?"

We all know the steps the Company has taken to mitigate failure, and whilst nobody in their right might can dismiss failure, it is imperative to acknowledge that success is an equal possibility.

My own view is that Modi 1 will see both success and failure. Some patients may be cured or partially cured whilst others succumb to their illness. Just look at SCIB1.

I don't see a COMPLETE success or failure at this stage. My initial thought was that your question was alluding to complete failure? Although that was not the words you used.

ATB

Personally, happy to buy under 30p.

DYOR

Hi Johnny,

Thanks for reply.

Ivy,

I see your point. If this were AZN or Merck then yes. Stacks of cash. Defined position in the market and space. Layers of talented staff. Supported by government. Why would they feel obliged to keep the market updated as often as a startup? Scancell on the other hand is a different story. They are in the process of defining themselves. Of course they will not ramp but they must remain aware and alert to opportunities. Communicating with the market is critical. Hence they have had something to talk about at AACR…

JonnyB1 Thanks.

I wonder if you are a lawyer (rhetoric) as you seem to have an eye for detail.

We know that the head and neck cancer patient posted an update also on the 21st Feb. I wonder if she and others were asked to wait to publicly announce any update until an official update could be made, hence the same date as the RNS? Probably unlikely and could just be coincidence. At first I thought it might be the organisers waiting for any scan results that fell on or around the 21st before releasing an RNS. Just in case there might be contradictory or outstanding data. However she said that she had received her 5th dose and scan on the 7th (which I presume to be also February). This patient is from cohort two.

I wonder then if it is possible to roughly extrapolate when we might see a second update RNS

16th Aug 2022: RNS first person dosed in cohort 2 of ModiFY phase 1 clinical trial
16th Aug 2022: Same RNS stated that all three patients in cohort 1 had received two doses
7th Feb 2023: Scan and fifth dose H& N patient in cohort 2
21st Feb: RNS update on ModiFY trial
21st Feb: Patient updated Mcmillian - I see the timing as largely irrelevant and most likely coincidental.

Random thoughts and questionable basis:

14 days happened to have elapsed from her last scan - dose to RNS. Again I don't see this as significant to just one patient, just the timing. Clearly we can't tie in the likelihood of an update based on one patient in one cohort of a basket trial, however as the dates are quite close (two weeks apart) might we get an idea as they follow a similar timeline?

I have always thought that we would get a second RNS update by mid April. Maybe before the end of the month.

Thoughts?

Well that told you Phantom- err not!

Think it’s time DB retired gracefully into the abyss…

Bamps

Thanks for taking the time. Very helpful. The thing to keep in mind is that the webcast was packed with useful information and interpretations. Everybody has time for that.

ATB