Member Info for HotblackDesiato

Hi Laz - just keep in mind the last RNS stated, "...is expected to commence in May 2025...", not "...will commence...". Despite appearances, the BoD won't want to shoot themselves in the foot (again) over timelines set in stone. My own guess is an RNS the first week in June re progress including some word on 1802, the 1801 paper and where they're at re the review of the 737 data package. They might even have a plan of attack for the CNS molecules.

We know there's lots of positive news to come. How the sp responds is the complete unknown.

Hi COL - thanks for the clarification.

Hi Hopkirk - "Otherwise, why not move ahead now?" It might be a case of a company is interested but the BoD want £x and they've been told you need to confirm 1801's safety before we even consider that sort of cash. If you recall, the BoD said the Oz trial results were better than they hoped for so these extended tox trials sound like they're more of a formality (and don't forget they wanted to make a 'dirtier' batch of 1801 specifically to try and induce tox issues in order to placate global authorities who prefer to know max tolerated doses etc.)

Hi LJ - from my digging, the BoD should have regular updates from the extended tox trial to confirm things are on track and there are no changes to procedures that would impact results. IF we've been steered down the tox study path by a potential partner rather than by a CRO, that partner will want to ensure timeframes and expectations are pretty strict. If they felt we're dragging our heels under the terms of any NDA they'll be on the phone pretty sharpish to remind the BoD of possible ramifications - if the BoD expect a pot of gold at the end of the tox trial then they have to ensure things run smoothly or the terms change.

Hi Bizzi - if a pharma comes out with a great drug the other pharmas don't just shrug and say 'game over', they get their own drug and compete within the market. If you thought SAR had a monopoly on Tyk2/Jak1 then you haven't understood the wider market.

Hi Laz - I wonder how many investors know how to look at Companies House data and trace directors across multiple businesses to look for any wrong doing etc. Not to mention, how many have read https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/market-abuse (hint: the link appears below the 'Post Message' button on this site!!!)

Regards.

In response to the Chancellor announcing the £20k limit on ISAs isn't going to change, Jason Hollands, managing director of online investment platform Bestinvest said (regarding S&S ISAs): "To get more people investing in equities requires a combination of better education, an appropriate regulatory environment so they can get the help they need in choosing a suitable investment, and the potential carrot of additional incentives." He added that "parts of the City" are "pushing for an overhaul of stocks and shares Isas, urging the chancellor to refocus these on UK equities to help revitalise the UK market". He continued: "Such arguments might appeal to a chancellor keen to see increased investment in UK domestic assets, but if she is minded to do this then we would urge a carrot rather than a stick-based approach."

Hmmmm, "...parts of the City...."?

Cynical replies only, please.

Hey Meg, few people can pull off the 'I comb my hair with a balloon' look and Geldof just about manages it. Get it wrong and it looks like a rat trap. (showing my age there)

My only concern with the RNS is that it doesn't mention biscuit levels. The only plausible reason is there's an NDA. A merger with McVitie's would be the ultimate curveball.

Thanks for the link, SOG. I guess big pharma will take a variety of approaches to compiling their pipelines - what disease will create highest revenue, which new treatments show promise in multiple indications, which candidate has most compelling attributes of progress/cost/indication, etc. etc.?

Not sure what the current AML treatment landscape looks like but 737 research by various groups suggests it's a worthy candidate for a variety of cancers.

I think it's more frustration than shock. Why was the mystery US-bio so secretive? Okay, they applied for an IND but what else did they do? Are they a standalone company or a subsiduary of a big pharma? Irrelevant now I suppose.

Do I expect it to get picked up now? Really no idea. There are plenty of research papers to say 737 is effective in the right setting but only the BoD will know what real interest there is within the pharma community. For all I know we'll get an RNS tomorrow stating it's been sold to your local Boots for 50p or Pfizer for £300m.

Regards.

Hi Celtic - SOG has often posted his thoughts on why GSK handed 737 back but also (if I recall correctly) there was a time element within the license deal and perhaps GSK couldn't progress it quickly enough as they had other priorities. Just because you're a global pharma, it doesn't mean you can get things done instantly - the bigger the organisation, the slower they often are to change direction. Momo was their target so they had other priorities.

Just a reminder, Niraparib is sold as Zejula...by GSK....who effectively got 737 for free when they merged with Sierra. If only they'd had the vision to have held onto it.

Title: THERAPEUTIC POTENTIAL OF NIRAPARIB, CCT245737, AND CONVENTIONAL THERAPY COMBINATIONS IN ACUTE MYELOBLASTIC LEUKEMIA: A PRELIMINARY IN VITRO STUDY

Summary/Conclusion:

In conclusion, this study shows the potential of combining Nir with CCT or conventional therapies in AML, presenting synergistic effects that vary depending on the cell line. The combination of both DDR inhibitors showed the most promising results, supporting the potential of DDR-targeted combinations as effective treatment strategies for AML.

https://library.ehaweb.org/eha/2025/eha2025-congress/4161524/ana.bela.sarmento-ribeiro.therapeutic.potential.of.niraparib.cct245737.and.html?f=menu%3D6%2Abrowseby%3D8%2Asortby%3D2%2Amedia%3D3%2Ace_id%3D2882%2Aot_id%3D31559%2Amarker%3D5845%2Afeatured%3D19595

https://meetingservices.org/eha-2025/index.php

Hi PCS - yes, good point re the “we’ve been advised” statement.

Hi all - IF we believe a T/O would be dependant on the 1801 tox study, what does that mean for 737? Either we can continue to seek its sale or on-license as the T/O buyer is more interested in 1801/2 or we can't do anything with it as they want the whole shooting match. IF they want the lot then there would have to be a binding agreement otherwise they can just walk away if they don't like the 1801 results meaning 737 has been stymied again.

As for those saying 'it shouldn't take this long to do xyz' - from their experience, I wonder how quickly they got their own drug trials done. I think the BoD said they expected the tox study to start in May. Still 10 working days left.

Hi Krone - we'll never know if the Chinese bunch solved the solubility issue and just kept the answer to themselves but since Tim has a PhD in computational chemistry, he would at least know if the problem were a deadend or not. Who knows, with advances in AI there might be an answer out there but our current funds don't allow further exploration.

Interesting stuff - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_chemistry

Hi PCS - https://sareum.com/patents/

Aurora and FLT3 Kinases Modulators: WO2013117522, US 9,133,180 (Granted Sept 2015), EP2812328 (Granted Nov 2015), JP 6034880 (Granted Oct 2016), CN 104169277 (Granted Oct 2016)

Whilst patents are generally 20yrs, Supplementary Protection Certificates can be granted in the EU to extend patent life by 5yrs. Drug patents can also be extended by tweaking the formula or developing new delivery methods.

The BoD are probably likely to remain focused on 1801/2, 737 and the newer CNS compounds unless we get a wodge of cash allowing them to revisit FLT3.

At $546 per tablet for the once-daily drug, it might entice some to have another crack at the solubility issue!

I'd be amazed if there was any human interaction here from the MMs, Mike. In this day and age I'd presume an algorithm controls things and people only step in if there's a glitch.