Member Info for Burble

AGM today was interesting, I definitely felt like there was some excitement in the room around both trial results and and the read out in due course. Had some good conversations afterwards with the CMC and BD folk.

Struggling with train WIFI on the way home atm, but will have a look through my notes and post something over the weekend.

Would be worth someone raising with Sath/Lindy at the AGM tomorrow.

Good question Berm!

I must admit I skimmed the RNS rather than reading it in full.

Why two month delay? Why now?

JB1 - you seem to be an oracle….correctly guessing an RNS would drop today….just not the RNS we wanted!

Keytruda to lose patent protection…if only there was the opportunity to licence something called Avidimab which could extend that….

I would agree with you JB1.

I was thinking about what could be presented at the AGM.

I think there will be some of the actual clinical data coming out of the modify trial - whether that's scans, or some of the head and neck resected patient data. I hope we will have more than just an overview slide of the trial.

C11

I wonder whether that's where paths crossed.

'Relationships are really important'

'Important to develop a strong story that identifies your uniqueness, the path forward into the future '

'Second, data is key. Building a strong dataset in a robust commercial environment is important'

'Third, building good relationships with both investors, but also the pharma industry is really important. As an example of that we will go to the JP Morgan conference in San Francisco in January to sit down face to face with both investors, but also the pharmaceutical companies, getting their feed back on what we're doing and will incorporate that into our future plans'

Three interesting points he raises in this video which we can compare to SCLP.

- We have a good story and we are unique in the fact we can build these DNA/moditope vaccines, they're off the shelf, well tolerated, good safety profile etc. Glymabs are also another string to our bow. We have four seperate platforms in development, each of which has the potential to generate more targets etc.

- We have data, both in vitro, in vivo, clinical and pre-clinical and that dataset is strengthening with every passing day. Whether that's in oncology, infectious disease, across the last 30 years our technology has also been used in flu, brain tumours, Covid-19 etc.

- We are speaking with investors and obviously have had some traction given that we have Genmab and another on board, we have Redmile, Vulpes etc. and we have been to a wide range of both academic, industry and investor conferences over the past year. With a real appetite from people to engage.

Did we present at JP Morgan this year? i can't remember whether we did?

Phil's appointment to me is a sign that Scancell are moving into a new phase of business and one which hopefully will be the inflection point on the share price.

Some interesting phrases within the RNS

'We are on the verge of a revolution in cancer therapy'

Is this talking broadly about the acceleration of cancer vaccines and the interest in them, or is he talking about something specific i.e. read outs from SCOPE and Modify trials over the next 6 months or so?

'Company's complementary cancer vaccine platforms'

Interesting phrase - I know people have spoken before about the fact that the immunobody platform could be used alongside moditope. Is this in reference to this? or is it a reference to the fact that we have two cancer vaccine platforms which 'could fill the pipeline of any large pharma company' or words to that effect?

'Showing incredible potential in the clinic'

We wait with baited breath to see what results show - but this is bullish.

'Realising the full potential of the core science'

I read this as people are waking up to the fact that this is something special and rather than give away the kitchen sink on the cheap, this new leadership will seek to really bring this to market and achieve the very best for shareholders and patients alike.

'With potential acceleration into the clinic with revenue generating deals' [Glymabs]

Suggests Genmab may be soon entering the clinic with their mAb and that the unknown person will be making a decision on whether to take up the other antibody they are trying. As a side note, does anyone know whether we get a single milestone payment for the Genmab moving to the clinic for all indications, or would it be multiple for each modality they take forward?

With exciting clinical data to move to a late-stage clinical company

I read as we want to take this forward solo - which given Phil's experience with Series C and D funding may be interesting.

Refocus my entrepreneurial skills on developing the portfolio

Does this mean Lindy has more ideas up her sleeve? Maybe SCIB2/Modi-2 or the mAbs being taken forward by SCLP.

'Adaptive immune responses include antibodies and T cells (CD4 and CD8), both of which can recognise damaged or infected cells. In order to destroy such cancerous or infected cells, Scancell uses either vaccines to induce immune responses or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to redirect immune cells or drugs.'

More out of my own curiosity, but interesting that there is still lots of mention about infected cells. This is not new as it's been in plenty of previous RNS announcements but it's interesting how that angle of Immunobody is not being forgotten about.

AGM at the end of the week too. Would there be precedent for Phil to attend?

Random thought I had at 0410 this morning.

Could our final SCIB1 patient have already been recruited and SCLP know that there scan is due some time this week.

Meaning they can announce before Friday?

Or am I just being too hopeful

£2 would be a sensible amount for me at the current stage in time, though I would caveat that with revisiting this once I've seen the full read out from the current SCOPE and moditope trials and/or if we get a avidimab licence or two.

So I guess the lack of RNS confirms that the update being given at the Festival of Biologics is only data that is already in the public domain.

Wonder therefore whether we get an update next Friday before the AGM.

Violin,

Something to bear in mind is zanzalintinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor - so a small molecule drug and from a class of drugs where there are others on the market - mechanisms are known. It's oral - which makes things easier to dose patients given that Keytruda is infusion, and being a small molecule it's also going to be cheap to produce.

Naturally these traits would be of interest to Merck.

Our time will come I'm sure.

Take with a pinch of salt, but I threw your comment into ChatGPT.

This was the response

Progression-Free Survival refers to the length of time during which the patients live without their cancer worsening. In this case, even after 10 months, the average time before the cancer started to progress hasn't been reached, meaning a number of patients still haven't experienced cancer progression by that point.

In summary, it suggests that many patients in the study are still living without their cancer worsening after 10 months, so the data isn't mature enough to calculate the average PFS yet.

So positive?

JB1 - could that mean that when the original blurb had been submitted other clinical trial targets had been met for this cohort, but not the mean PFS. This has now been met.

Unsure, just thinking aloud here - others may read it differently

Matt, maybe that's a good question to ask at the AGM.

'What are the plans if results are good from the SCOPE/Modify trial to broadcast this? What channels would you look to use and in what format'

'latest updates' can read in two ways - either we get new updates, next week or they're talking about updates that are already in the public domain.

Though it would tee up the AGM well if they did give a proper update.

As I've said before, they're really now emphasising the 'off the shelf' nature of their vaccines.

Good to hear from you LL. Hope you’re doing well and life is treating you kindly.

Complete the existing SCOPE trial recruitment and scans, then make a decision as to whether to go SCIB1 (in the smaller cohort) or iSCIB1 in the larger cohort.

Wouldn't surprise me if both have been drafted (and possibly already submitted) to MHRA and Health Research Authority to cover both options.

They talk about wanting a seamless transition into it, so you could find that this is just hedging bets in case data from the iSCIB1+ trial means they choose the first.

But that's just me hypothesising.