Member Info for Dalester

ICR , based in London... "We're a global strategic healthcare communications team with a deep understanding of the IR, PR and capital markets challenges standing between your innovation and success....

This release is marked " confidential" .. it would appear that it may have been made public by mistake, maybe its an example of their work that should not have been released.... perhaps some sorþ of trial posting on Scancells website?

If they are auditioning PR companies, they must have something to make it worthwhile? Do we know if they have used this company previously?

I

Aim market is struggling.....

https://www.cityam.com/aim-listed-companies-sinks-to-lowest-level-since-2001/

TF, sorry if my AI posts annoy you, they are intended to inform some of the more technical conversations in a more easily understandable way. I was interested in the prophylactic scenario and wondered to what extent ( or if) there was an inheritable aspect whereby if one person in the family gets melanoma the others might also be susceptible .. seems some are at risk. There is an immediate case for offering family members a Scib course... imagine that in Australia!

Ai overview

Yes, melanoma can be inherited, though most cases are not due to a single gene but rather a combination of genetic and environmental factors. A family history of melanoma increases the risk, and about 1 in 10 melanomas are thought to be caused by genes that can run in families. Specific genes like CDKN2A and CDK4 are often implicated in these familial cases.

Elaboration:

Familial Melanoma:

While most melanomas are sporadic (occurring in individuals without a family history), some cases are familial, meaning they run in families.

Genetic Factors:

Mutations in certain genes, such as CDKN2A, CDK4, BAP1, and others, can increase the risk of developing melanoma. These mutations are often passed down through families in an autosomal dominant pattern, meaning that even one copy of the altered gene can increase the risk.

Other Factors:

Along with genetic factors, environmental factors like sun exposure also play a significant role in melanoma development.

Increased Risk:

Individuals with a family history of melanoma, especially if multiple first-degree relatives (parents, siblings, children) have been diagnosed, are at a higher risk of developing the disease.

I wonder why they never seem to talk to Scancell about their vaccines and future plans? There would be no story st all if Scancell and their investors hadn't spent years backing Lindy's ideas about Cancer.. or is Phil H too busy to bother with them right now?

Bottom Line (with 6-month PFS clarified):

SCIB1’s 80% PFS at 6 months, 72% ORR, and 20% CR are absolutely standout results for advanced melanoma. Here's why this is potentially market-leading:

It outperforms Keytruda monotherapy by a wide margin across all measures.

It beats Opdivo + Yervoy combo in CR and PFS, and matches or beats ORR — with potentially less toxicity if the vaccine is well-tolerated.

It compares favorably with the Moderna mRNA-4157 data, even if that was in the adjuvant setting (though trial designs differ).

If these results hold up in a larger cohort, SCIB1 could become a first-in-class DNA vaccine with front-line potential or a powerful combo partner with checkpoint inhibitors.

Let me know if you want help framing this as an investor or clinical development summary. Want a concise pitch-style overview?

Updated Context: SCIB1 in Advanced Melanoma

PFS at 6 months: 80%

CR: 20%

ORR: 72%

DCR: 84%

Population: Advanced melanoma (SCOPE study)

Therapy type: DNA cancer vaccine

How does this stack up at 6 months?

Here’s a comparison to Keytruda (pembrolizumab) and Opdivo + Yervoy combo in advanced melanoma:

1. Keytruda Monotherapy

6-month PFS: ~46–50%

ORR: ~33–35%

CR: ~5–7%

2. Opdivo + Yervoy

6-month PFS: ~57–60%

ORR: ~58–61%

CR: ~11–12%

3. Moderna + Merck mRNA-4157 + Keytruda (Adjuvant)

6-month PFS (estimated from curve): ~75–78%

ORR/CR: Not always reported due to adjuvant setting

Bottom Line (with 6-month PFS clarified):

SCIB1’s 80% PFS at 6 months, 72% ORR, and 20% CR are absolutely standout results for advanced melanoma. Here's why this is potentially market-leading:

It outperforms Keytruda monotherapy by a wide margin across all measures.

It beats Opdivo + Yervoy combo in CR and PFS, and matches or beats ORR — with potentially less toxicity if the vaccine is well-tolerated.

It compares favorably with the Moderna mRNA-4157 data, even if that was in the adjuvant setting (though trial designs differ).

If these results hold up in a larger cohort, SCIB1 could become a first-in-class DNA vaccine with front-line potential or a powerful combo partner with checkpoint inhibitors.

Let me know if you want help framing this as an investor or clinical development summary. Want a concise pitch-style overview?

Updated Context: SCIB1 in Advanced Melanoma

PFS at 6 months: 80%

CR: 20%

ORR: 72%

DCR: 84%

Population: Advanced melanoma (SCOPE study)

Therapy type: DNA cancer vaccine

How does this stack up at 6 months?

Here’s a comparison to Keytruda (pembrolizumab) and Opdivo + Yervoy combo in advanced melanoma:

1. Keytruda Monotherapy

6-month PFS: ~46–50%

ORR: ~33–35%

CR: ~5–7%

2. Opdivo + Yervoy

6-month PFS: ~57–60%

ORR: ~58–61%

CR: ~11–12%

3. Moderna + Merck mRNA-4157 + Keytruda (Adjuvant)

6-month PFS (estimated from curve): ~75–78%

Bottom Line (with 6-month PFS c

🧪 Your Vaccine Data (in 25 patients):

Disease Control Rate (DCR): 84%

Progression-Free Survival (PFS): 80% (likely at a set timepoint—do you know which?)

Complete Response (CR): 20%

Objective Response Rate (ORR): 72%

🧬 How This Compares to Market-Leading Melanoma Therapies:

1. Checkpoint Inhibitors (current gold standard):

Nivolumab (Opdivo) + Ipilimumab (Yervoy) combo:

ORR: ~58–61%

CR: ~8–12%

Median PFS: ~11.5 months

DCR: ~70–75%

✅ Your data beats this on ORR, CR, and DCR — if confirmed in larger studies, that’s huge.

2. mRNA Vaccine Combo (Moderna + Merck’s mRNA-4157 + Keytruda):

In high-risk resected melanoma:

PFS benefit: ~44% reduction in recurrence or death vs Keytruda alone

PFS at 18 months: ~78.6% vs 62.2% for Keytruda alone

✅ Your 80% PFS looks very competitive depending on the timepoint (especially if it’s 12+ months).

3. TIL therapy (like Iovance’s Lifileucel):

ORR: ~36%

CR: ~4%

Median PFS: ~4.1 months

✅ Your numbers are much better here.

🧠 Bottom Line:

If this melanoma vaccine is showing 72% ORR and 20% CR in a late-line or even adjuvant setting, that’s exceptional. Not just competitive — potentially market-leading, at least in terms of response metrics.

However, keep in mind:

Small cohort (n=25) = early days

Durability of response & overall survival (OS) still matter

It’ll need a larger Phase 2/3 to validate

Https://x.com/ftworldnews/status/1911556565099757701

To hear Phil H talking about increasing shareholder value and hitting deadlines... he is clearly a man with a plan that he intends to execute on time... exciting times ahead now with different products due to report progress and a clear endorsement from HMG to help push us along...My only criticism is the need to explain what they are up to in laymans terms that the press can use and their readers can more readily understand.

And presumably Avidimab could be used in conjunction with vetinary Mabs too

AI......Examples of mAbs used in veterinary medicine

Lokivetmab (Cytopoint): An mAb that treats pruritus in dogs with atopic dermatitis

Monoclonal antibodies for osteoarthritis: Reduce pain by targeting nerve growth factor (NGF)

Monoclonal antibodies for parvovirus: Fight infections

Monoclonal antibodies for arthritis: Treat pain and inflammation in dogs and cats

Has anyone had a play with this pricing calculator from the EU?

fairpricingcalculator.eu

It needs someone with a bit more knowledge than me about the patient numbers in the EU but the answers might give a realistic idea about the value of scib in the EU on a per patient basis.. its an official EU calculator

Just filter them Roses, I do and if everyone else did it there would be no point to them, the real problem lies with the website not the market, Aim shares have wilder fluctuations hence the potential for rampers and de-rampers to affect sentiment, its a kind of vicious cycle. and needs stopping, but until then I just filter and ignore them and stick to the views of posters who have been around long enough to see through the BS. I am happy with my investment here be it longer term than I anticipated but its my money , so the annoyances don't overly bother me .. I cant see them!

True enough TF, but Aim was a different place in those days. It has become a chancers playground since then... its now home to day traders rather than investors, ideally, for me, SCLP would move to either the main market or better still Nasdaq. The UK is essentially knackered with 4 and a half more years of decline and disinvestment to look forwards to, whilst the US will be going gangbusters over the same period, a time when a small pharma with exciting products should expect to be doing dollar deals worth billions... only to see them devalued by incompetence and low expectations at the governmental level.

I think thats a decent assessment EE the new CEO has cleared the decks and the runway is now clear for 2 years or thereabouts , enough to cover trials and has given himself a much stronger negotiating position which in turn points to his having something negotiable. The SP isnt going to look pretty for a while but the fundamentals are stronger and if the persistent seller gets his business done should start behaving a bit more predictably. Maybe they have another morsel of good news for us once the raise is completed?

I am thinking that if there are discussions going on with the other glycan mabs, maybe they didnt want to disclose the upfront payment as they are negotiating a bigger number with someone else. So they have told the truth but maybe have been somewhat reticent about the whole truth. The new CEO may have a different view about structuring a deal but since there was already a format with Genmab he was happy to let this one happen .. its money in the bank that wasnt there before however much it amounts to and probably reinforces his hand in other conversations as it would be unlikely that Genmab would come back again if their first candidate wasnt working for them...other parties will have noted the continued Genmab interest and if they want a slice of the cake, the ante just went up....,

January 1st is also the start of a new financial year in most of the world which may have some bearing on the timing of this deal....

But you have to wonder why the Board dont set up a camera and a decent microphone or two and post the whole AGM for everyone to see... its just good investor relations.... and good potential investor relations too.

Munich, Germany, October 11, 2024 – CatalYm today announces the appointment of Anne Burger, Chief Financial Officer of CatalYm, as Interim CEO. Anne succeeds Phil L’Huillier, who is stepping down from the company. The company has an active search for his successor underway.

“We are confident in CatalYm’s strong foundation and bright future as we continue our progress toward becoming a leader in immuno-oncology,” said Rogier Rooswinkel, CatalYm Board Member. “With our USD 150M Series D raise just behind us, an experienced management team and encouraging data in last-line cancer patients, CatalYm is fully equipped to drive forward and we remain steadfast in our mission to advance innovative therapies that improve patient outcomes. On behalf of the board, I want to thank Phil for his contribution to CatalYm’s successful transition into an advanced-stage oncology company.

Anne Burger, Chief Financial Officer and interim CEO stated: “CatalYm is in a strong position backed by a high-profile syndicate of international investors and significant momentum for visugromab, our key cancer therapy resistance mechanism targeting approach. On behalf of the entire CatalYm team and management, I want to express our deep gratitude for Phil’s unwavering belief in visugromab and his dedication, energy, and tireless advocacy, which have been instrumental in bringing us to where we are today. We are ready to execute on the next stage of our clinical strategy to achieve our vision of breaking immunosuppressive barriers to improve therapeutic outcomes.“

Ha ha ha they blanked the link.....still if you use the key words you will probablt find it....