Member Info for Fadec92

Is it the infill sampling that is being talked off?

“Landore commenced an infill soil-till sampling programme in July 2020, covering 2,400 metres from the western extent of the BAM Gold Deposit, aimed at confirming the drill targets identified in the highly successful 2019 soil-till campaign. 455 samples with controls have been submitted to the laboratory for analysis with results expected in September 2020”

SRA737 is no interest to Sierra, they have had enough time to find a resolution and the new director hasn’t changed that focus on Momelotinib, what they want is not just to give it back because of the development time/cost they put into it, until they find somebody willing to license, I think Covid short term has made it hard to find one with the pharma market resources lent towards this!

Wouldn’t they just say that if they were active, there’s nothing price sensitive and that’s what Sierra said last June that they were talking to an immunotherapy company in partnering, Tim said that their preferred route was to on license again, so in my eyes that’s getting rid of it with a cut from the deal and future earnings but have no involvement, with the time difference I think they might be finding hard to get someone to on license too!

PF-06700841 Estimated Study Completion Date - December 3, 2020

Still would be good to get them selectivity profiles, it’s not where I usually see at medchemexpress!

With the PF-06700841 which is a dual JAK Inhibitor in my view as the IC50’s are similar but it’s not just a Topical cream as it’s in plenty of other indications orally!

https://imgur.com/a/7Nr5Bl3

That’s the PF-06700841 (TYK2/JAK1) Brepocitinib-Topical!

This one is the selective TYK2 - PF-06826647

Looks like Pifzer are going down the route of different selectivity profiles of JAK members for each indications rather than the Norm of one molecule for all indications to achieve the claim just made by the CEO that they have Best in Class!

https://imgur.com/a/YtG9Y8V

So knowing this shouldn’t SDC-1801 be more tailored for a specific indications as Tim’s words on interviews is too leave open to a potential licensing partner, where as Pfizer’s Data suggests otherwise of a molecule as in TYK2 being more set in a particular indication, so obviously I think they would be looking at this change in thinking!

https://s21.q4cdn.com/317678438/files/doc_presentations/2020/09/Inflammation-Immunology_FINAL.pdf

Luvelyjubley that’s the very successful Checkpoint inhibitors as in PD-L1 immunotherapy drugs ie Keytruda that Gilead is talking off, it’s easy to get mixed up as SRA737 is a Chk1 inhibitor!

“Gilead purchase of immunomedics and the analysis of the market returns of the drug Trodelvy. The analysis reviews the areas of potential returns based on market share and one statement mentions "the expert also sees opportunity for pairing the drug with checkpoint inhibitors"

One too watch to see how it progresses It seams to be claiming that it is not selective for JAK2 the same as SDC-1801, would be nice to see the molecule profile too compare with SDC-1801 to see if it has a better or worse profile based on the IC50 data!

Pifzer TYK2 Inhibitor (PF-06826647) for the Treatment of Autoimmune Diseases!

“With understanding of PK/PD relationships, a target profile balancing TYK2 potency and selectivity over off-target JAK2 was established. Lead optimization involved modulating potency, selectivity, and ADME properties which led to the identification of the clinical candidate PF-06826647”

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.0c00948

No I think Robin Davidson did a hour ago, so I think they seen that one!

Desamax they have just seen your post and tweeted it! Lol..

https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2017-004927-56/GB#E

I think the bottom line is no one knows what or why it was Prematurely Ended, was the patents dosed don’t know, but what I do know from the records above is the end of the trial was much before Sierra was talking about non-dilutive ways to finance SRA737 and the preliminary results in June 2019 and the anogenital route for SRA!

If they all use their skills in business which they are doing then this will be a very profitable venture for all companies involved!

Thanks guys! :/) thumbs up! Lol

Yes agreed I think the Patents in place would be a must for a license holder, and for a much better termed deal!

I think T Cell leukemia lymphoma was removed from the patent to focus on solid tumors in the examiners election requirement, so I think Sareum had too make a choice between the two!

I don’t think this generic link is up to date!

“In addition, it also engaged in developing SRA141, an orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of the cell division cycle 7 kinase that is in the preclinical development stage.“

Brighty/Krone it’s almost like their trying to hype up news that’s not newsworthy, nothing we already know here!

It’s unbelievable the disconnect between market caps of both companies when comparing pipeline, they have 2 therapy’s in Phase trials and 4 in Pre-clinical!

4d has 5 in Phase trials and 3 in Pre-clinical!

https://imgur.com/a/hGdvDJP

“We are extremely pleased with these highly clinically meaningful SER-109 Phase 3 study results, greatly exceeding the statistical threshold provided by the FDA. Based on our prior discussions with the FDA, we believe this trial should provide the efficacy basis for submitting an application for product approval. We look forward to meeting with the FDA as soon as possible to discuss the regulatory path forward with the goal of bringing SER-109 to patients as a first-in-class microbiome therapeutic,” said Eric D. Shaff, President and Chief Executive Officer of Seres. “Our results represent the first-ever positive pivotal clinical study results for a targeted microbiome drug candidate. We believe these Phase 3 data provide strong validation for our underlying microbiome therapeutics platform, which has been the scientific basis for the Company, as well as persuasive clinical evidence supporting our other active pipeline programs.”

“We would like to thank all those who participated in this landmark study. Based on these highly positive SER-109 ECOSPOR III results, we believe that this novel microbiome therapeutic candidate could potentially provide a much-needed effective oral treatment option for the approximately 170,000 patients in the U.S. that suffer from recurrent CDI annually,” said Lisa von Moltke, M.D., FCP, Chief Medical Officer of Seres. “Seres applied a data-driven and scientifically rigorous approach to develop SER-109. The proprietary scientific learnings we have obtained continue to drive our overall R&D efforts and the advancement of our other ongoing microbiome therapeutic programs.“

https://ir.serestherapeutics.com/node/9421/pdf