RE: Scientific RNS26 Sep 2022 11:05
Hi CleanerWorld. Hopefully you’ve had a good weekend. Let me respond to your questions with the caveat that this is purely my opinion.
1 - agree the world needs a pan covid vaccine that is easy to administer and store. But who would be the partner? I suspect it might be someone who hasn’t already had a shot at goal. Though AZ may want another stab at things. I also wonder whether it could be a partner interested either in oncology or infectious disease (so utilising immunobody for either).
I’m also curious as to what financially the large player see with covid going forward. Is it going to be a trickle of income for years to come through repeated boosters, or will they see it as an opportunity to boost profits with a single vaccine which works for years but is given to everyone currently needing it and then new borns as routine vaccinations? This will also depend heavily on how society sees covid going forward as this will dictate how big the market size is and therefore return on investment. Many don't care any longer, hence the drop in people bothering to get vaccinated despite being eligible.
A pan covid vaccine would capture a large market briefly, but repeat sales would be small - especially if others join the market as competition. In comparison, yearly boosters are a repeat income source however tie up other assets/staff. We therefore could see a situation where others decide not to bother to compete, leaving a single player to develop and deploy a pan covid vaccine.
2 - Modify trials. I suspect we will hear something in the next few weeks on this. Mid October would fit nicely with the previous announcement from FPD to Cohort 2. That would coincide nicely with AGM whenever that is this year. I suspect comprehensive early data may be slightly reserved (due to small patient numbers), so AGM body language may be the giveaway as to how things are really going at the coal face as they say.
3 - Posters generally will not be peer reviewed as a paper normally is. They’re presented as is. Peer review of these happens generally in person as dialogue between scientists at the conference. Indeed of the posters I’ve presented at conferences, some of the most interesting and probing questions or disagreements on conclusions drawn have come from other conference attendees. They really make you sit back and think ‘is the conclusion I have drawn really telling me what I think it is, or have I missed something out entirely?’
4 - I beg to differ. Whilst you don’t need to understand the science, announcing that you have two separate posters on two different aspects of a platform at the same conference is good for investors. For novice investors it highlights that LD is confident in the science and is happy to present to the scientific community data in this format. From a scientific perspective I’m interested to see the data presented - especially paying attention to statistic significance (p-values) in comparisons bet
Sign In
Follow the stocks
