Member Info for crumbs

Might be a bit of awkwardness in Philly though when scancell and Ichor get together lol.. but all fair and the SCIB1 trial is still very much in Ichors interests as much as scancells

There is no downside as long is it is as effective as electroporation and indications are it is and indeed probably better ... possibly means a bigger dose can be given as Ichor is limited to 8mg(2 x 4mg hits).... no need for the device and no patient pain from electro shock punch of electroporation-bruises ... just a simple jab...
But I'm supposing you mean the current SCIB1 trial... well it is too late we are all signed up with Ichor and the vaccine is made to be used using the Ichor not the lipo nanos... to be fair the Ichor does work our first trial proved it.. but getting away from it to me and many others removes a rather large hurdle that I've always felt made ImmunoBody a far harder sell to potential partners ...

ImmunoBody just became a far easier product to administer and to get clinically approved and with it a far better chance of becoming a commercially viable product, another good news story for scancell to take into talks in Philly and another part of the pipeline that is now more attractive to partnering deals than ever before......could there be a SCIB1 trial using nano in China in combo with a Chinese PD1 for instance!

'rinity Delta view: The use of a nanoparticle formulation, which will enable delivery via standard injection procedures, should facilitate regulatory interactions and recruitment into clinical trials, compared to electroporation delivery. On top of this, it removes a potential barrier to adoption, should SCIB2 reach the market, as no special delivery equipment will be required to deliver the therapy. It is also reassuring that in preclinical studies delivery via the nanoparticle formulation can generate an immune response at least comparable to that produced when using a validated electroporation system.

If the nanoparticle formulation approach proves to generate strong immune responses in the Phase I/II study, it is possible that the SCIB1 programme could be transitioned to use the same formulation in the future.

We value Scancell at £82.0m, equivalent to 21.1p a share.'

Scancell’s second ImmunoBody, SCIB2, will use a new lipid nanoparticle formulation and will be delivered via a standard injection to patients in the planned Phase I/II study, rather than using electroporation.
A known lipid carrier is used in the formulation, with the nanoparticles optimised to deliver SCIB2 (a DNA vaccine) efficiently to immune cells without degradation of the DNA.
Based on preclinical studies, Scancell believes the delivery of the ImmunoBody to the immune cells using the nanoparticle formulation should be at least comparable to, and could be better than, using electroporation.
SCIB2 is being developed in a collaboration between Scancell and Cancer Research UK (CRUK), and is designed to induce an immune response against the tumour-associated antigen, NY-ESO-1, which is expressed in many different tumours (including sarcomas, neuroblastomas, myeloma, NSCLC, prostate and breast cancers).
CRUK is responsible for funding and conducting the Phase I/II clinical trial with SCIB2 in NSCLC. At the end of the study, Scancell will have the option (no terms disclosed) to acquire the data to support the further development of SCIB2. No timings have been disclosed for the Phase I/II study.

Interestingly BioNtech are into lipid nano delivery too for their mRNA vaccines... seems to be the way to go

Tweet...retweeted by Scancell... remember he is close to them and in weekly contact also his last scancell tweet mentions SCIB! going into trial and 2 more trials next year....

'John Glencross
?

@GlencrossJohn
Follow Follow @GlencrossJohn
More
Today saw a significant announcement by Scancell which has gone largely without comment. The nanoparticle approach to deliver SCIB2 for a range of common solid tumours incl NSCLC moves the project closer to a CRUK led clinical trial & may in time be preferable approach for SCIB1'

Scancell did the nano delivery research money has been spent by scancell on it its somewhere in one of the year report RNSs and they have now decided on the best version and convinced CRUK to use it at their own expense.....From the little bit of data we have seen from calculus event it improves on previou pre clinicals SCIB2 results

Yes Ray the beauty here is it's an area they are working on and because CRUK will license this particular version of the tech scancell are not tied to any third-party for the new delivery...All very positive.....I agree there will be no change on SCIB1 now...For its trial that's using Ichor but makes doing a deal on SCIB1 immunoBody platform much more attractive to potential partners

Plenty to flaunt in Philly....No more reliance on Ichor....Cheers CRUK expected but much needed progress news this

This CRUk licensing a delivery that could transform ImmuoBody...None dilutive IP enhancement......I'd expect the trial to begin next year

I can put it more clearly... the commerciality of one companies products seems a none starter with one not failed(the product did not kill anyone) but certainly not wow cor blimey that is a product that is going to change oncology for good (all patients did die as expected possibly a few gaining a little more time due to product but needs much bigger trials to prove that up) to another company who already has a very successful trial under its belt for one of its in-house created products (unlike other bio who buys in tech as scientific team not the best) with a majority of patients still alive beyond expected norms and some even cured... plus that is just one product of one platform of a 3 pronged pipeline the moditope platform already of serious interest to BioNtech and Genentech, names that will never be associated with the other bio ... just like Keith Flaherty, M.D., Director of the Termeer Center for Targeted Therapy at Massachusetts General Hospital and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School has been named the Principal Investigator. Joining Dr Flaherty are Dr Jennifer Wargo of the Department of Surgical Oncology at MD Anderson, Dr Michael Davies of the Department of Melanoma Oncology at MD Anderson, Dr Paul Chapman in the Melanoma/Sarcoma Service at Memorial Sloan Kettering and Dr Rene Gonzalez of the Division of Medical Oncology at University of Colorado.

you will never see those names associated with the other bio ... never see a paid for trial by CRUK never see the likes of our new moditope CAB team etc etc... quite simply a different class of bio which in the end ought to earn its rewards for investors whereas the other bio... oh well... an AIM lesson

And Ichor are there too

From good ol google on peptide storage I found this... but not being a biochemist who knows if relates to moditope?

'For maximum stability, peptides should be stored in a freezer at -20 degrees C and away from bright light. Most peptides are stable for at least 12-18 months in these conditions. Try to avoid using a frost-free freezer because repeated changes in moisture and temperature may affect stability. Bear in mind peptides that go through repeated freeze-thaw cycles are also susceptible to degradation.'

I would think full product clinical amount manufacturing will not happen until tox testing is complete so the end of the year then trial starting beginning of 2020....

Sally: 'It very much depends what the product is moditope is very different from SCIB1 and SCIB2 they are obviously DNA plasmids...and the general shelf life of a DNA plasmid is very good and if you made a big batch it would last several years,moditope is different it's a peptide and there will be some adjuvant component as well and we haven't done stability studies on moditope yet but I can almost guarantee you that peptides aren't as resilient as plasmids generally speaking in terms of their long term storage...but it depends on the size of the batch you make your either going to run out of material or your going to run out of shelf life one way or the other'

Actually, I found it... was a question to Sally at 2016 AGM... She doesn't give an actual shelf life and obviously, they were a long way off manufacturing it then but she did explain its shelf life will be a lot less than a DNA plasmid i.e ImmunoBody.... I'll try and do a word for word...recording is not the best

Oh well.. stick a yellow sticker on it and sell it off cheap

I'm pretty sure scancell possibly at an AGM (not last one) was asked about the shelf life of moditope and they said it was not a long one... obviously a lot more work has since been done but it will have a shelf life just like ImmunoBody does....

I think for the new hires the prospect of scancell was/is they will be very busy doing what they are best at! And will be in many ways in charge as obviously their skills are ones Lindy and Sally did not have to the standard and/or the time to fulfil the roles by themselves...it seems to me both have stepped into their roles very well and are doing just what they have been hired for in Sam's case the TCRs and Adrian getting modi1 to be a product ready and able to go into the clinic and to indeed go commercial after that (on positive results)...both very experienced hires and dare we say ambitious people....Sam was at Immunocore before it was even Immunocre and will know their tech intimately as she was a pivotal part of its creation and development ...of course Lindy will have seduced her but... she will no doubt be working very closely with BioNtech so will know a hell of a lot more about that collaboration and its potential than us and she was brought in one year into that collaboration too so obviously for a very good reason.

So sounds like the first part of the manufacture of the clinical trial modi1 has begun with polypeptide and then moves on to AMRI for the final product..... I can't remember for sure but seem to think the question has been asked and moditope has a shelf life of only a few months?

· Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) synthesis of the bulk Modi-1 peptide conjugates is underway at the PolyPeptide Group's facilities in The Netherlands.

· The Company signed an agreement at the end of April 2019 with AMRI (Glasgow, UK), a global contract and manufacturing organisation, to formulate, manufacture and package the Modi-1 GMP final product for clinical testing.

· The preclinical toxicity testing programme required prior to the start of the clinical trial commenced in April 2019 and is anticipated to be completed during H2 2019.