Member Info for HotblackDesiato

As a slight aside, I see one of the paper's reviewers was Physiomics. They did initial work for us & CRT on SRA737 - https://www.physiomics.co.uk/collaboration-with-sareum-the-icr-and-crt/

I wonder if they are also involved in the translational studies for 1802.

Just in case C79 missed this new paper (Oct 2023) - "Adjusting the dose of traditional drugs combined with immunotherapy: reshaping the immune microenvironment in lung cancer"

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374571846_Adjusting_the_dose_of_traditional_drugs_combined_with_immunotherapy_reshaping_the_immune_microenvironment_in_lung_cancer

If the above link doesn't work try https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1256740/full

737 mentioned in Section 3 and Table 1.

Hola, Elcap - to entice lots of new investors to a niche, high risk area, you need a major story - the pandemic was a good example with pharmas large and small seeing huge upswings in sp (ah, those were the days).

As for the world of blockbuster movies, they have a limited shelf life at the cinema where everyone is paying £10+ to see it. After 6mths you can buy the DVD and let the whole family see it for £15. Unlike your health, entertainment is ultimately disposable so the film companies have a limited time to squeeze every penny out of a project. For every blockbuster the film company has probably made a loss on 4 or 5 other films.

Anyhoo, mañana es otro día.

Hi Basil - even if we got interviewed by the BBC or The Times etc., what can the BoD say beyond we've got a drug in the early stages of clinical trials?

If the journalist was doing a piece on new drugs, we've not even reached the 'real patients with psoriasis' stage yet so we're not exactly of national importance at the moment. Any science article would be more interested in reporting miraculous results in live patients or how someone has just discovered a particular mechanism for something or other within the body.

The BoD could talk endlessly about the hurdles a small company has to negotiate and the MHRA debacle but that alone won't attract new investors - until we've got efficacy data, Sareum is just another voice in the crowd. That doesn't sell newspapers. The general public wants to know about cures, not promising treatments. At this stage of the game I'd much rather have big pharma knowing who we are (and they do).

If we have class leading results next summer then that might get a few column inches but until then, we're just one amongst many as far as the media is concerned.

Just found this re unmet medical needs - definitely worth a read.

https://www.politico.eu/article/drug-development-unmet-medical-needs-pharma-industry/

Hi Ahfam - I've no idea how we punters might guesstimate a value for 'unmet medical needs'. On one hand, it could be the case that there is no (or limited) treatment for a disease therefore any new drug would be worth a huge amount, but on the other hand, big pharma might have already considered diseases lacking currently effective treatments and they're of the opinion that either the patient population is too small to warrant development or the disease is just too difficult to treat.

I minded of the sort of news report you sometimes see where some unlucky person has a rare condition and treatment is £100k+ a year. If development has cost £2/3bn and the risk of contracting the disease is, say, 1 in 5 million then per patient treatment needs to be incredibly expensive for the pharma to make a bean.

I just hope that the BoD fully recognise a lowball offer as and when any come our way.

The other little nugget I picked up on (listen from 27:10 in the video) is John states that the current direction for 1801, "...will best position the molecule to address significant unmet medical needs within the autoimmune disease space and that will deliver value to shareholders but there is broader potential for 1801...."

Am I right that 'unmet medical needs' = kerrchinggg?

Maybe $4bn is too cheap. Roll on next summer!

Just with regard to John Reader stating that there are thousands of pages of data from the 737 trials, I wonder how that has impacted the timescale to progress any potential deals i.e. I presume an interested party will have to crunch the individual numbers from the raw data to confirm Sierra's declared findings etc. With £Xmillions riding on those results, you'd want to be 100% sure Sierra's analysis is correct before signing a deal.

He also touched on the fact that you have to consider which exisiting treatment may benefit most from being used in combo with 737. Just because the Sierra trials used Gemcitabine and Cisplatin doesn't mean to say they will be the most synergistic of treatments.

When you consider all the factors involved, it's no wonder deals can take their time to emerge.

Totally agree, Krone. Plus I'm more and more convinced that the RF deal was the best solution to short term funding pending a 737 deal. If the BoD had issued £5m worth of new shares to the market in one go then it might prove to be over-dilution if a 737 deal is imminent. Plus I doubt they would have been able to drip-feed new shares in smaller chunks as and when required.

They have the facility to drawdown more money IF required.

The BoD have been very strategic re funding in the interim.

Ah, I actually meant 'of its development'.

Either way, we demand answers!!

Evening Ben, I've already submitted a question for the IM event, "When do you expect SDC-1802 will progress to the next stage if its development?" Short and to the point.

No doubt they'll say that 1801 has been their main focus and money has been spent getting it into the clinic but I hope they'll add that the funding from RF will now allow them to get the translational studies completed within a timescale of X.

I imagine others will have submitted similar questions.

Hi Bailiff - maybe if Shepherd can access their potential funds in time, they could head RF off at the pass and get the sp back on track sooner rather than later.

A Monday RNS to say the food effects part of the study is now underway would certainly give the meeting a lift (and maybe the sp too).

Conscious of the fact I spoke too soon in a previous post, all I'll say here is the recent advert for a 15-night trial (which corresponds with the escalating multi-dose stage) no longer appears on the Nucleus Network recruitment page so I'll take that as progress.

At least the MAD & food trials can run in parallel with each other whereas the final one with psoriasis patients can only begin once all preceding cohorts have had their results reviewed by the safety committee.

Onwards!

Maybe they're working a large buy order from Shepherd or AN Other and there aren't enough ex-RF shares floating about.

Hi Basil - the points you mention are all understandable however the problem we shareholders have is we only get to see the SAR landscape from one perspective. The BoD, to some degree, must walk a tightrope i.e. they'll maybe want to tell shareholders more than they can but at the same time they don't want to give competitors any info that could be detrimental to us.

I'm aware the above might give the appearance that I'm happy with everything and giving the BoD an easy time but without knowing all the facts, it's too easy to point fingers.

I think the final results for the year end will be due in about 4wks time.

Sorry folks, just looking at the Nucleus Network site and I've maybe got ahead of myself -

https://www.nucleusnetwork.com/au/participate-in-a-trial/melbourne-clinical-trials/

As the recruitment page changed from 6-nights to 15-nights I immediately assumed they were now looking for the final recruits however I now think they may have had some patients from the multi-dose study drop out and don't have a reserve list therefore they need to sign up more people.

Also, if they were now looking for psoriasis patients the 'advert' would be on the 'Patient Studies' tab rather than the 'Healthy Studies' tab (there is no direct webpage address for the Patient Studies details, you just have to click on it from the main clinical trials tab). The 'Patient Studies' tab should probably have an entry saying something like, "Healthy males and females with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis."

The final study doesn't appear to require a 15-night stay at the unit as the trial doc states, "The participants will be confined to the CPU from mid-afternoon or evening of Day -1 to Day 5; then participants will be discharged temporarily from the CPU on Day 5. Participants will return to the CPU daily between Day 6 to Day 12 for study assessments and study drug administration.

Participants will be re-admitted to CPU residence from Day 13 to Day 15, and then will be discharged from CPU residence on Day 15. Participants will return to the CPU daily between Day 16 to Day 19 "

My apologies if the recruitment isn't quite as far along as I thought - I certainly wouldn't want to mislead anyone.

Hi Ahfam - this bloke explains the difference between 1a & 1b (spoiler: 1b is multi-dose)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1Na7m54Z4

He has his hat on backwards which tells me his is a righteous and trustworthy dude.

Hi Blue - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phases_of_clinical_research

Single dose = 1a

Multiple dose = 1b