Member Info for inanaco

made on the trial results in patients treated with SCIB1 .......... • All 16 patients showed a vaccine-epitope specific proliferation response ex vivo and an IFNγ Elispot response in-vitro following T-cell expansion. IFNγ Elispot response = inflammation

Inflammation ........... all we need to know is ... Can it induce ... Moditope is the same Immunobody is the same this is why the share carries so little risk from the science point of view. Once you see inflammation the immune system has kicked in. Interferon gamma (IFNγ) Its not about billions of poor quality low avidity t cells its all about the High Avidity t cells that can break into the cancer and inflame ... So the science is Automatic ... it has to work as this is the Model the immune system uses when it successfully clears Vaccination of HLA-DR4 transgenic mice with SCIB1 induced high frequency and avidity T cell responses that resulted in survival (40%) of mice with established B16F1-DR4 tumors. SCIB1 vaccination was associated with increased infiltration of CD4 and CD8 T cells within the tumor but was also associated with upregulation of PD-L1 within the tumor environment. PD-1 blockade also resulted in increased CD8 T cell infiltration and an anti-tumor response with 50% of mice showing long term survival. In line with our hypothesis that PD-1/PD-L1 signaling results in inhibition of proliferation of high avidity T cells at the tumor site, the combination of PD-1 blockade with vaccination, enhanced the number and proliferation of the CD8 tumor infiltrate. This resulted in a potent anti-tumor response with 80% survival of the mice. so its simple .... SCIB1 creates inflammation causing the cancer PD1 to up regulate to try and counter the effect .... so this is the scales SCIB1 T cell releases Interferon cause inflammation........ cancer responds by up regulating PD1 ligand. turning off the t cells. in balance ... cancer stops growing but is now a chronic decease. Hit with the PD1 ... balance shifts back to the t cells they start killing again ... result tumour clearance. That's been shown time and again now in other trials to be the pattern .. I cannot find fault, i really have tried.

its more complicated than that, Wild, these sub sets may indeed fluctuate with the checkpoints, but that does not mean you have a innate to adaptive response to actually monitor, which is the important part. This is an environment in the patient that's difficult to access. Your dead right on the incremental understanding thou. It will take a very complex trial to build an algorithm of dosage changes to be able to control these cells to achieve the exact "environment" to possibly get the immune system to kick in. Its all about the inflammation . give the patient immunobody

In the short term not, as it appears that they can use this cell subset as a marker while treating using a combination of ctl4/pd1 in this instance they will try to maintain a specific % or balance in treatment. Its possible that at some point a scib1/pd1/ctl4 combo is tried, but i think it would be getting quite toxic, and at this point better to use moditope which just over rides the immune suppression

anybody watch the vids IMHO would consider this to, the returns are exponential with so many different avenues open for deals. it makes a compelling case now to wait for one to appear. for those interesting in Mrna .... this paper is worth a read https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3597572/

Its a land grab, ever angle is being covered and secured......... how it pans out is completely controlled by Scancell .... i suggest grab the shares ... don't hold them ..Grab them LOL

Boom your trying to point out that Scancells technology could be taken up by an Mrna manufacturer and i appreciate that ........... I am pointing out that the reasoning behind building a complex Mrna vaccine is crazy when a simple peptide vaccine does the job 100% proven kill in the mouse

mRNA Pharmaceuticals BioNTech is building three therapy platforms using pharmacologically optimized protein coding mRNA with targeted in vivo delivery to individualize cancer immunotherapy, for prophylactic vaccines and protein replacement therapies. could easily sign up to Mrna development program or maybe they won't ... scancell ip of modi1 would be damaged with a potential competitive vaccine which it now has only an interest.

yes your asking me to survey the patents to identify all aspects .... to deliver to you ... while at the same time calling my posts nonsense when you have not one shred of evidence to indicate interest in Mrna by scancell who has produced a vaccine that hits the 100% mark i just do not understand why your continuing to debate ... what reasoning is driving this .. a couple of big pharma deals ?

wow .. your questioning my understanding yet asking for my IP .... so i will throw it back at you ... Mrna is not new !! its been around since late 1990's ... scancell did not decide to go down this route with immunobody or Moditope just because Big Pharma is playing Catch up does not mean the current Mrna technology has been shown to be more successful we know that big pharma buys to trend ... one starts, they bandwagon ... and look what its cost them. which is exactly why we are in such a good position now ... would scancell do a deal for MRNa ... why would it ...? its already built a vaccine that yields 100%

100% of mice survive and against a re-challenge ... cannot be improved upon ......... so your asking if Mrna is viable against that back drop ? should we spend another £4m and three years considering that. would another party consider that a better option ?

Boom as you well know once you break the Protein down it could be applied to any of the developed science of vaccines car t etc etc a patent is covering all avenues, it does not mean that the protein will be used in all avenues. Its a legal "control order" ....so only scancell identifies the route to market, which it so far has done.

C7 ... not making anyone buy .. stop making stuff up ...indeed i tend to pull up over exuberance .... Krafty Krafty1305 I don't see any complication, it gets complicated when posters add Car T and Mrna .. to the mix and then post I don't know ... considering that poster is a techie it adds a dimension of "radical" the question then is can it be reasoned. Unfortunately not ... as that would involve scrapping the Immunobody and moditope vaccine design. and why would BioNtech sign up for an exclusive collaboration ...spend a year in discovery mode, for scancell to market to another. When it has the option. the issue is nobody questions the posters ... typical every day is a "sunny day" .....

so you don't want folks to buy and hold is that correct ? what do you want ? what message should we send out .... Don't buy and Hold Dont Buy Sell ... if your holding ... getting a bit silly now eh !

C7 i am not interested in your opinion ... on me ! if you want to discuss "your Share" no problem, I am not sure now what your asking ? """At the end of the day anybody not in with their highest level of shares, might, lose out on one RNS, that is a fact, but doesnt that apply to many other shares.""" is that a statement or a self answering question .

ONW is now trying to suggest that only "failed investors" have called it wrong ... """distressed""" """"why the market's wrong and distressed holders (ie underwater) are right.""""" If you guys actually look at the signals ONW is sending out, they are dreadful "painting a picture that the market is correct" when in reality how can it be ... ONW is posting with hypocrisy .. by now suggesting what the flint is ? or trying to find the flint. So, although I'm not looking for the pitch for the CRUK grant to fail, BUT since virtually everyone on this BB's saying it's pretty well in the bag, should the grant not happen then that's a DISAPPOINTMENT requiring another £20M to appear to plug the gap. This is precisely what's happened here time and time again. A potentially positive future event is done to death and then when it arrives nothing happens SP wise there's wringing of hands and all the reasons are trooped out as to why the market's wrong and distressed holders (ie underwater) are right. I reserve the right to post as i see it .......... Tick tock

ONW's question in context to his very recent posting history, so first post is ONW;s question to Boom second post is ONW's answer to Ray Third post is ONW to wild BS I wonder whether you have any pet ideas as to the short term possibilities for SCLP... it's obvious that the "phoney war" we've all been enduring of late is getting to the BB and although I remember your summary of expected news posted a few days ago, would you care to venture any radical suggestions as to what might "flint the tinder" for us? I must admit to having no idea what could be the catalyst... any number or combinations of events could do the trick, but knowing you have a more analytical outlook than many (but not all) any suggestion from you would be helpful to me. Knowing that I'm really going against your usual restrained approach in these matters, I felt it might be a question worth posing, but if you'd prefer not respond I'd quite understand. ATB SCLPRE: ONWMon 09:20 Ray Interesting, but since you say, " The triggering of the herding instinct obviously needs a catalyst and I think, at present, this is most likely to be trial results. Having said that, winning the grand challenge could also be that catalyst. Who knows with the AIM market." Sadly Trial results move us further along the timelines, but we'll have to agree to differ on the Grand Challenge issue. I'll say I'm perhaps slightly more optimistic (timewise) than you are, and I'll stick with the catalyst being an unknown issue being announced (hopefully sooner rather than later). In any case we'll all find out eventually! :-) AIMO ATB SCLPRE: Cruk Grand ChallengeMon 08:51 Wild, Inadvertantly (I think) you've rather made my point for me too! :-) Reading your comments on Grand Challenge (the import of which certainly isn't lost on me) you've posted, "it's just a matter of waiting til November now ... but should they be successful, scancell will get to advance some of its technology with the up to �20M and help of some very big names in immuno oncology !" So, although I'm not looking for the pitch for the CRUK grant to fail, BUT since virtually everyone on this BB's saying it's pretty well in the bag, should the grant not happen then that's a DISAPPOINTMENT requiring another �20M to appear to plug the gap. This is precisely what's happened here time and time again. A potentially positive future event is done to death and then when it arrives nothing happens SP wise there's wringing of hands and all the reasons are trooped out as to why the market's wrong and distressed holders (ie underwater) are right. I wish I knew what the catalyst for the journey to the moon for SCLP (SP wise) will be, but I've simply no idea. I wouldn't mind betting it'll be something that noone's even thought of, and let's face it, all the reasons that have been put forward here on this BB over the years haven't exactly been right have they? S

good .. lol could

so the issue is Not finding the flint, but trying to second guess scancell on timetables of deals ... which is why we then come back to the discussion on "holding" ... and the reasons behind it. "the Can Of Worms"

interesting question ONW, but i thought you wanted to post on the commercial aspects and create an ""alternative view"" surely if you do that , you must also consider "all events" in the calendar that good spark an RNS and any current discussion on going as per RNS yielding a deal. I cannot see how you cannot find the Flint ....