The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Seawolf - when did you contact them? It might be that the target figure has been reached and the offer is now closed - just a thought.
Thanks for the update Seawolf. I was trying to get through to Halifax when your post popped up so it's saved me a wait.
Regards.
If I've read things right then 1801 may well be at least equal to Sotyktu, possibly even better.
The RNS noted, "...interim data shows that levels of SDC-1801 in blood are already in the expected therapeutic range, and achieve concentrations greater than those predicted to reduce signalling of cytokines dependent on TYK2 and/or JAK1 activity by 50% for a sustained period following once daily oral dosing."
So what this suggests is akin to a high jumper being able to clear the bar with room to spare. What remains to be seen is just how much higher can 1801 jump?
Sotyktu achieves a reduction of IL-17A, IL-19 and beta-defensin by 47% to 50%, 72%, and 81% to 84% respectively following 16 weeks of once-daily treatment (link below). 1801 appears to be in the 50%+ club so it's all still to play for.
https://www.sotyktuhcp.com/mechanism-of-action
Regards.
Hi Meg - I've previously mused that the BoD take a lower salary with bonuses based on share performance as a way of focusing their business minds.
I agree Damion that the next RNS has to bring clarity but I don't know what the timescales are with regards to a rights offering e.g. if they announced one tomorrow, are they able to say it will take place on, say, 8th April or does it have to be within a day or two of the announcement? This is why I wonder if they'll just say they've enough money for the moment but then issue another RNS at the end of next week to declare a rights offer - I'm presuming at this end of the financial year most punters will have used up their ISA allowance so it's maybe better to wait a week or so and do it for the start of the next year when punters maybe have the funds to support it.
Reported stolen: capital letters, last seen on a computer screen just moments ago. WTF?
i presume rf are dumping shares simply to maximise tax losses for the current financial year ahead of whatever their own plans for readmission are. there was some apparent confusion posted the other day about whether riverfort were rgo or not, from the related rns the finance ****fest was with, "...riverfort global opportunities pcc ltd (the "investors" or "riverfort") as arranged by riverfort global capital ltd..." (perhaps their understanding of the word 'investor' is different to mine.)
anyway, in a best case scenario i think we'll get the interim results tomorrow stating they have enough funds to get the 1a data readout and this will form the basis of a new funding arrangement. this will buy the bod a short space of time. they could then do a public offering in the new financial year - punters getting cheap shares that they can have straight in their isas. if they take this approach i think they could get enough money to see us through 2024 & p1b. the bod would do well to also say they're on a reduced wage bill until the end of p1b.
as others have pointed out, the majority of shares are in the hands of punters and we want a fair return. as long as the bod don't act like weasels we can all profit.
if everything works out and new finance allows the sp to rebound then it might be worth remembering the cgt allowance for the next financial year will be just £3000 so if anyone has any shares (not just in sar) outside of an isa it might be worth getting your act together. this is not financial advice, just an observation.
fasten your seatbelts for tomorrow, it could get bumpy.
That's right Potnak, T & J will probably only know if there's been any major adverse effects. Since 1801 did well in the preclinical tox report, I doubt we'll see anything that would prevent 1b taking place.
Hi Potnak - as far as I'm aware both 1a & 1b are double blinded so the doctors handing out the medication don't know if the patient is getting a placebo or the real drug. Only a couple of people at the dispensary will know what they are handing to the doctor. It's only once the trial is complete that the results become unblinded and they know who took what. That way there can be no influence on the patient or doctor i.e. they've given some pills to a patient who then begins to feel unwell but they won't know if it's down to 1801 or some placebo effect until the trial is over.
As far as placebos go, the mind can play many tricks on our body. Studies have shown the colour of a pill has an impact on efficacy e.g. people respond better to red pills over yellow pills and 2 pills must surely be better than 1 pill etc. An injection is perceived to be more potent than a pill and so on. There are also studies that have shown that even when someone knows they are taking a placebo, they feel it has a positive impact.
When I posted that link a couple of days ago I meant to also include the one below on JAK inhibitors & the herpes virus as one of the doctors in the original article noted a patient developing the viral infection.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7328488/
It looks like JAK1 might be the pick of the bunch as the paper notes, "Emerging and pooled data may suggest that inhibition of JAK 2 and JAK 3 may be associated with a higher risk of VZV infection, while selectivity for JAK 1 may be associated with a lower risk of zoster infection."
Still all to play for and P1b results (if we ever get there!) should catapult us forward.
Hi SOG - the unfortunate thing is that since there is so much money to be gained or lost by big pharma, industrial espionage and other cloak and dagger shennanigans is almost common practice. I've mentioned a book, Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre, before and the wiki link below is certainly worth a read if people don't have access to the book (especially the Bad Regulators section that talks about the MHRA).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Pharma
Regards.
Just had a look at what Sotyktu (deucravacitinib) costs and it's eye-watering. I know pharma has to recoup costs etc. but I didn'r realise it was so expensive -
"BMS has set a list price of $6,164 for a 30-day supply of the new drug, which is around 42% higher than the $4,344 Amgen charges wholesalers for a 30-day supply of Otezla, ahead of any discounts or rebates."
https://pharmaphorum.com/news/bms-scores-first-approval-for-psoriasis-therapy-sotyktu
And sur le continent it's 10,000 euros for 30 tablets - https://everyone.org/sotyktu-deucravacitinib
IF 1801 can equal or better it in the clinic then it could be a nice little earner. Surely funding can't be too difficult!!
Not a single comment re this over on the RGO board - must tell you something about the company.
Thanks for the update, chaps.
I hope the BoD can pull a rabbit out of the hat next week when they publish the first half results which should hopefully also outline their plans for the immediate future. With the new tax year just a fortnight away I'm expecting them to announce a public offer to help get 1801 across the line.
Hi SOG - just as a sidenote, it's sometimes interesting to learn about the patient's experience of a new drug and since Deucravacitinib/Sotyktu seems to be the current yardstick, the link below might be of interest -
https://www.dermatologytimes.com/view/deucravacitinib-a-year-in-review
Hi SOG - the paper certainly gives a good indication that 1801 (formerly SAR-20347) should perform very well in the clinic when compared to other compounds.
"Both Tyk2 mutant mice and mice treated with SAR-20347 showed significant reduction of IL-6 and IL-17 in imiquimod-induced skin lesions, but only SAR-20347-treated mice presented reduced levels of IL-23, decreased keratinocyte proliferation and improved clinical score."
and
"Blocking both Tyk2 and Jak1 in this study was more effective than inhibition of Tyk2 alone at reducing psoriasis-like disease severity, keratinocyte proliferation, as well as IL-23, IL-17, IL-6, IL-22, and antimicrobial peptide gene expression, and the authors postulate that targeting a combination of Jak1 and Tyk2 using an orally available inhibitor may be a viable approach for treating psoriasis."
Yes, the proof will be in the pudding but the smell coming from the kitchen in Oz is very good indeed.
If the BoD do read this board then they might all mysteriously have dental or hair appointments to go to later this morning.
On the other hand they might be quite happy to meet with just a couple of concerned but level-headed investors. If they are there at least try to find out who has 737!
Hi C79, apart from a bad case of the AIM blues all is well here, thanks.
As Potnak speculates on another thread, 737 might be in the hands of someone looking to quickly move it on to a bigger player. Since 737 has shown promising results when combined with PARP1 inhibitors (demonstrating synergistic effects in killing mammary and ovarian cancer cells), it might be worth looking at the current PARP front runners -
Olaparib: Developed by AstraZeneca. It has been approved for the treatment of patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious germline BRCA (gBRCA)-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who have been treated with three or more prior lines of chemotherapy, as well as for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, who had a complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy.
Rucaparib and Niraparib: Developed by GSK. Rucaparib has been approved for the treatment of ovarian cancer associated with HR deficiency and for patients with deleterious BRCA-mutated metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Niraparib was initially approved for ovarian cancer associated with HR deficiency but later expanded to patients with ovarian cancer regardless of their HR-deficient status.
Veliparib: Developed by AbbVie. It is undergoing phase 3 clinical trials as a combination therapy for breast, ovarian, and lung cancers. Veliparib is an effective PARPs catalytic inhibitor with low IC50 values and increases sensitivity to treatments with DNA-damaging reagents, such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy.
Talazoparib: Developed by Pfizer. It was approved for advanced breast cancer patients with gBRCA mutations. Talazoparib is known for its potent PARPs trapping ability and is the largest in size among the PARP inhibitors.
Since these drugs are targeting various types of cancer, including ovarian, breast, and pancreatic cancers maybe a 737 combo could be an option.
Regards.
Indeed, Potnak. As CPF were in the driving seat for 737 I wonder if they just used the quick 'cookie-cutter' Sierra type of arrangement to get 737 moving rather than spending much more time to arrive at an albeit potentially better financial deal.
So from a certain perspective our current woes are maybe directly related to CPF not being able to maximise the 737 deal? Who knows?
Morning Potnak - I think the BoD expected a better 737 deal rather than a carbon copy of the Sierra one. They probably hoped our upfront payment would cover liabilities to RF and see us in the clear.