Member Info for Chelsea11

Thanks for all inputs although I remain confused. I guess the principal point I’m looking to understand is what are the minimum requirements needed to kick off the Registration Trial, from a data analysis perspective. Maybe I’m asking for an answer that as of now, cannot be provided.

This might be a dumb question but will ask anyway if anybody can give an answer.

Will all 3 SCIB Cohorts have to be fully completed before the best vaccine candidate can be selected for the planned Phase 2/3 Registration Trial?

So for example, could that selection be approved using the data only from Cohort 1 and Cohort 3, if Cohort 2 progress is slow?

TIA.

And the direct, specific relevance to Scancell?

Perhaps my posts asking you for an explanation of your posts you can’t offer, aren’t for you. So why don’t you block me?

And the relevance to Scancell is……???

Berm - you are right of course. The cancer drug development business is very tough. However, it is littered with failures historically and that will undoubtedly be the case going forward too. I could dredge up dozens and dozens of examples from a basic Google search. They will hugely outweigh any winners for sure and I’d really hope everyone here understands that investment risk already without being pointed to the next failure unrelated to Scancell.

HAGW.

Nothing to do with Scancell.

Absolutely Burble.

If I could pick one thing I’d like him to provide a clear update on, it would be the recruitment position in the 3x SCIB Cohorts.

Lots happening.

Yep, as had been previously pointed out, the known (to most) timing of the Interim Results, which will include post-period updates. These will be in addition to the important positive Modi clinical progress announced on 09/01. Good company newsflow in January and a high profile conference attendance in the bag.

CP - as you’ve just said it yourself, you very clearly believe meaningful results are 2 years away.

So why are you bleating about the absence of them now then?

You could well be right WTP and that just double underlines the point that any poster suggesting that the results within that 09/01 RNS were insignificant, are talking total bobbins.

LOL as you put it CP.

Faster reverse than an Italian tank!

The Modi results were of little consequence? Wow.

Nothing?

What about the positive Modi-1 RNS on 9th Jan?

What about the Interim Results we can expect within the next week or so, which will include post period updates?

Nothing? Really??

I guess it’s not impossible there will be some sort of post period up date on the Genmab collaborations, even if that is just along the lines of “continue to progress their investigations”.

That would at least underpin a no news is good news take on things.

Quote from Forbes insight into the 2025 JP Morgan Healthcare Conference.

“good science and good data will reign supreme”

The data continues to be harvested here. Jackpot?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/juergeneckhardt/2025/01/16/5-insights-from-the-2025-jp-morgan-healthcare-conference/

HAGW!

Agree Chester. I was expecting notice of those results to arrive this week. If not tomorrow, it should be 1st half of next week, so imminent post-period news to look forward to. Surely it will include recruitment updates.

It’s true that anyone who buys shares does it to make money.

However it’s also true that an investor can be selective in which areas they wish to support with their money. That may include for personal to them reasons.

Https://www.insidermedia.com/news/north-east/another-record-year-of-profits-for-ramsdens-as-growth-continues-across-all-of-its-income-streams

Enough in there to reach and maintain 250p+ this quarter? I’d be disappointed if not.

CP - curious that you have posted questions on possible SP catalysts bang on top of the post containing a link to the up to date Trinity Delta report. Are they not all clear within that?