RE: Great AGM31 Oct 2025 10:19
Bit of a further update, now I review my notes:
1. When the slides come out, you’ll note a slide with four blank categories in which the data has been redacted. The full (board-only) version would have shown the company logos of the companies with which discussions have been taking place. Some of these 35 were plainly non-starters for reasons of strategy or some other reason. But Phil said that “over half” of them were in the two left-hand boxes……in other words in some form of active discussion.
2. Phil emphasised the importance of monotherapy data to pharma and also the relevance of PFS. In my view, the latter is the reason why Modi-1 data hasn’t yet been published, because they are looking to present data that hits a particular PFS duration. Phil admitted that he’d been wrong to expect the data being published in Q3…..and my guess is that the delay is tied up with one or more of the ongoing discussions.
3. I asked a Q about relations with the UK government and the CVLP. It is clear that they hope to use this both in the registration trial and also going forward with Modi-1. After, discussing with both Phil and Sath, I pointed out that Scancell should be in the sweet spot politically, because the government needs some wins and Scancell potentially would tick boxes for both Wes Streeting and Rachel Reeves, with her growth mantra. I got the impression that there are discussions in the background.
4. Callum Scott had come down to London and should have been at the AGM, but had been waylaid by the need to work on “regulatory filings”.
5. Advanced melanoma is a $3bn market opportunity. Earlier treatment would be a much bigger market (nb cohort 4 results may have relevance on that).
6. Glymab Therapeutics is clearly a spin-off option and may be subdivided again to facilitate partnering and raise capital (ie……I think they will sell partnering rights on one or two products for cash and perhaps put them into a JV structure).
7. Much comment re the challenges being faced by cell therapy and bespoke RNA vaccines. Phil observed that the expense and logistical complexities are likely to mean that they can never pay off for health care systemss - and would be poor value for money.
8. GT200 is a new antibody which would target ovarian cancer (further comment beyond my paygrade)
9. Regulatory filings are major task at present. Filing with MHRA and EMA as well as with FDA - and these filings are “proximal” as Phil put it. Will file an IND in Q1.
10. Balerno (I think) asked whether Genmab were sitting on their deals. This was rebutted by Phil and even more forcefully by Lindy, making clear that both were being actively developed and Lindy noted that Genmab were manufacturing (if I understood her correctly)
11. Nobody thinks there is much value in AIM - and institutional investors in particular are put off (according to Sath). One might conclude that they think the AIM market is mispricing the assets.
12. I asked both Reinau
Sign In
Follow the stocks
