Member Info for inanaco

having already posted the actual wording from the PDF ... i don't have to think it , i already can read the difference

so basically the report contradicts itself ...

can you post that actual text with the link ....

Thank you

will you posted the script from the hardman report that backs up your claim ?

have you posted the script yet from the hardman report ? Ruckrover

why don't you use your superb English skills to discuss the science ? ONW

can you post any post you have made that actually is "pure science based" .....

or is your entire intellectual capacity devoted to spelling and sentence construction ... if that is the case what exactly have you achieved ? are you an English teacher ? because your posts just come across as pedantic and to most unreadable

no, in the absence of inflammation the epitopes which mod1 targets are not upregulated onto the tumour cell surface thus the immunity is regulated.

"""In the absence of inflammation, immunity is regulated, whereas in its
presence CD4 responses to modified self-antigens are stimulated. """"

so the T cells that Modi1 induce are "pro Inflammatory"

so this is always the issue with cold cancers you have to turn up the inflammation ....

https://www.scancell.co.uk/file-manager/scientific-papers/aacr-2015-poster.pdf

BioNTech research collaboration
Research collaboration
In January 2018, Scancell received a strong endorsement of its Moditope platform
when it entered into an important research collaboration with BioNTech, one of
Europe’s leading immuno-oncology companies. This new partnership will investigate
the potential for developing T-cell receptor-based therapies for the treatment of
cancer. The initial research focus is to identify and characterise TCRs specific for the
citrullinated Modi-1 epitopes. Engineering T-cells to express these CD4-specific TCRs
would represent a novel form of personalised cell therapy for treating cancer.

http://hardmanandco.com/docs/default-source/company-docs/scancell-documents/15.02.18-validating-and-de-risking-of-multiple-opportunities.pdf

Ruckrover stated

"""I was simply quoting from the Hardman report who use the word in “evaluation starts” and “initial evaluation complete”"""

do you have the link ?

well C7 its simple ... prove up the science of the collaboration as an evaluation rather than as described in RNS as

""" discover and characterise T cell receptors specific for citrullinated epitopes from vimentin and enolase."""

good luck

well Boom the Hardman report is not written by Lindy ......

and i agree your post was on the process of identification ......... which as you have described does Not appear to be "evaluating"

so your attempt to smear the English language to suit Ruckrovers lack of understanding of the science was indeed a complete waste of your time and mine.

like wise Ruckrover has not questioned any of the science i have posted today .. which would bring in the word "evaluation" in the context of this collaboration

so rather than just accepting what i posted was correct ....

we yet again get all this garbage

in which case did lindy use the word "evaluate" Boom ?

did your post indicate that the process of identification was indeed evaluating ?

as C7 posted the evaluation is carried out on the commercial side, not the science side.

lets try it another way

If you had of understood what Lindy had described in the video and the RNS you would not have used the word Evaluate

repeat again the Hardman report is not an RNS

In which case you did not have to argue the point, and indeed boom didn't either, you could have just replied ... agree "evaluate" could mean " discover and characterise T cell receptors" as per the RNS,

the Hardman report is not an RNS

but still you left boom trying to defend your post !!

and now you post like some conquering hero .. when actually boom has already left the stage as he must have accepted that his post was not novel in context as i already mentioned it at 9.03 post

my 9.03 already mentioned it


"""""Lindy has already explained the science of identification in the Feb Vid for Calculus.""""

so your simple post was not novel in context, and indeed nobody else asked the question

what did this mean ""Lindy has already explained the science of identification in the Feb Vid for Calculus."""

so basically i have already pointed out your post knowing that those interested will have already listened to it and those that did not could have asked the question.

the problem with making things to simple is this .............. Ray

problem boom when you simplify to far ....

The process in very simple terms is:-

1) Stimulate human blood
2) Introduce dye that allows identification of CD4 cells responding to Modi1 epitopes
3) Sort cells - single cell per well (across hundreds of wells)
4) BioNTech then expand DNA from that single cell, identify gene encoding the TCR and clone it

my second response to you is .. why does this take longer than 11 days then ?

as per biontechs website ... 11 day turn around is possible.

now you have a problem ? how do you reply

"level of understanding"

BioNtech has to evaluate how it uses the information gained, Not Scancell, because we have already identified the route to market.

because the modi1 epitopes have multicancer application, ie up to 17 targets, getting the right "TCR" for each target is important as that is down to how Hot the cancer is in the first place. You are in fact trying to build many models of an immune response which then can be deployed in a personal way.

so in effect your building a data base of the TCR and identifying what that TCR does and how it does it. ie this will link back in to scancells mouse experiments indeed as Lindy has shown different adjuvants change the response of the vaccine to pro inflammatory .....

golden rule

Citrullination is present in a wide range of inflammatory tissues, suggesting that this process is inflammation dependent rather than disease dependent.

Moditope

In the absence of inflammation, immunity is regulated, whereas in its presence CD4 responses to modified self-antigens are stimulated

its is important, evaluation implies a higher risk ........

characterise = """ describe the distinctive nature or features of.""""

During TCR activation in a particular cytokine milieu, naive CD4 T cells may differentiate into one of several lineages of T helper (Th) cells, including Th1, Th2, Th17, and iTreg, as defined by their pattern of cytokine production and function. In this review, we summarize the discovery, functions, and relationships among Th cells; the cytokine and signaling requirements for their development; the networks of transcription factors involved in their differentiation; the epigenetic regulation of their key cytokines and transcription factors; and human diseases involving defective CD4 T cell differentiation.

IMHO the complexity for BioNtech is to build the complex picture of the CD4 activated response

so Modi1 a TH1 slew CD4 t cells with the adjuvant as the promoter once the T cells response is activated a further CD4 linage is activated as we know including memory cells. these are very clever cells, far more complex than CD8

so BioNtech has to """ describe the distinctive nature or features of."""" before they build a personal TCR vaccine.

which is the model and Age of the red car.

perception based on miss understanding is not quite the same IVy However if you feel that scancell is still evaluating the Modi1 epitopes why would they have gone into manufacture ?

If
1/ they cant find any t cells that respond
2/ the t cells produced did not work

after all this is exactly what they are doing .......... seeking out the TCR's that are most effective from the modi1 epitopes

now if they cannot find any the Moditope patent is DEAD

that is not the case is it ?