Member Info for inanaco

but that is not our responsibility ............. and i certainly won't dress up what i consider poor data .. like you to appease who exactly ....

this is the Scancell BB ... we do not run UK life science .. we don't regulate and we don't fund others

we operate in Capital markets ............ efficiency of production brings reward ..

in our case Efficacy with a small cost base .brings reward

the CEO says ......... get the data from the trials ...

great data ....... great deals etc ...

what do you know Bermuda that the CEO does not ... i thought we are waiting trial results .. thus why would you consider a deal today ?

you are picking a fight again ........ your now claiming i have looked at Oxford, that if i am right ... i get a EGO boost ....

now you are bringing in the question of SCIB1 ...

yet ... you have never sat on the BOD of scancell ... how have you obtained such detail ... ? fascinated

Bermuda
You're right, you did attack the science and performance of the Oxford vaccine - nobody knows whether it will succeed or fail but if it fails, I'm sure you'll be back telling us that you were right

I look at it from this angle ......... would i invest

No ...

if i am wrong i make nothing ... if i am right ... i make nothing ...

totally disagree .. bermuda

You said the same thing about Inovio 6 years ago ...

the virus is still present ...

we are managing the death rates ...

the gov succeeded in not letting the NHS collapse ... .......... the key

we are still managing the virus ...

if you can stop the virus .. maybe you can better explain Nom ...

those interested ...

Texas
China
korea

etc

I don't think that is the issue Chester

cancer will kill far more than ever covid will ... yet does not command "pandemic status" or a £300 billion response
if your ran those numbers through "Nice" .. the Government expenditure would have been stopped ... "what are you doing"

The point i made months ago was that the vaccines already developed by Oxford seem to fail or induce poor response rates

in fairness because i do invest in this area perhaps I am more aware than a Gov official ...

but that does not mean you should ignore failure ... or indeed get a better understanding ...

a £2m grant to produce data ... no issues

a £20m grant to take it into a trial without appraisal ........ is suspect

they did not advertise the grant ... it appears the Gov approached them ..

level playing field ...

I agree Chester ........ but you still have to observe a level playing field ... when playing Scatter cash

bermuda .. you defended why they should get funding quoting the advantage of the science

this was after I attacked the science and the history ... which defiantly showed poor responses ...

and now MRNA could be viewed as suspect ...the Roche Biontech trial has really highlighted the Immune response as poor

how that pans out could be very significant for scancell ....

well maybe it is good you have moved on ..... and that is a great find ... post rec

lets try to be more accommodating in future, together we can bounce ideas ... apart it always ends in nit picking ...

what ever ..... the major cost is relative to patient numbers .........

""No the costs aren't the same - at all.""

i used "single umbrella"

if you want to run the thread why didn't you start it ? you could have generated the initial posts

why do you have to nit pick ? .. you did this the other day with knowlesi ... and his "never see the light of day posts"

what is your motive to do this ?

MTFB ?

I would also point out that in effect we are funding 4 cohorts ............ calling them trial or cohort the costs are the same ...

presented as one or four ........ the data collected is the same ....

the cheaper bit is the cost of ""regulatory submission"" .................. and a single trial investigator

Medical Background
Professor Chan qualified as a doctor at Nottingham University Medical School and went on to focus his medical training in Oncology through research and training at Oxford, Cambridge and London hospitals and universities.

Over the last 25 years, he has played a pivotal role in the discovery and licensing of a number of new chemotherapy treatments as well as novel targeted therapies. He is the senior author for over 100 research papers in world-renowned scientific journals and book chapters on new cancer drug development.

Professor Chan leads The Nottingham Personalised Therapy Oncology Research Group, and the Breast & Gynaecological Clinical Trial Group at the Nottingham University Hospital. The group’s current interests include the development of new cancer genes and tests to select the best treatment for individual patients.

He is the Senior Author of two new publications in 2015 on a new Cancer Gene “HAGE”; and a new index “ the Nottingham Prognostic Response Index”. These are likely improve the treatment results of breast cancer with

so a Key Man ...

Iain McNeish is Professor of Oncology and Head of the Division of Cancer within the Department of Surgery and Cancer. He is also the Director of the Ovarian Cancer Action Research Centre and Cancer theme lead in the Imperial NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Externally, he is Chair of the NCRI Gynaecological CSG.

His research focusses on ovarian cancer, specifically developing improved therapies through improved understanding of disease biology. With James Brenton in Cambridge, he co-leads the BriTROC translational research collaborative and holds a programme grant from Cancer Research UK investigating copy number alterations in ovarian high grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) as a possible prognostic and predictive biomarker. His group has also recently developed novel transplantable murine models of HGSC using CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing technology to allow investigation of novel therapies in an immunocompetent model. These transplantable cells are freely available to researchers.

for those not understanding ...........

if you look at who is on Scancells advisory Board ... you will appreciate what i am saying

Chairman, Professor Robert Coleman MBBS, MD, FRCP, FRCPE
Professor Christian Ottensmeier MD, PhD, FRCP
Professor Poulam Patel MD, PhD, MBBS, FRCP
Professor Iain McNeish MD, PhD, FRCP
Professor David Miles MB, BS, BSc, FRCP, MD
Professor Stephen Chan DM, FRCP, FRCR

You will see Oncolgist from who specialist in specific cancers

the separate cohorts are Not treated by the same oncologist

But all done under one umbrella

To build vaccines .......... the benefit to Scancell in my opinion is enormous ...... very few have cracked it .. I suggest Genexine has and Scancell ... who else has superb data ... ?
which means the industry, to scratch a living diverted to trying to control the micro environment within the cancer

in which case everything that gets approved has the potential to have synergy with the vaccine induced T cells ..

the market is coming to Scancell even thou the stock market does not understand why ....

Efficacy Efficacy Efficacy

single phase 1 trial to access safety ........... then 4 independent of each other trials of which one "head and neck cancer" may have another run in period ... if they add a check point. But all done under one umbrella

potentially .... 17 major cancers could use Modi1 ........ however the efficacy would vary, so i would suggest Scancell can improve efficacy by switching peptides, adding peptides or boosting either modi2 or modi1 with each other

this is why the Cost of R@D and trials rockets to £3b plus ....

but to get to that stage Efficacy is Key ........ of both Modi1 and 2 ....

Don't forget Modi2 could be even more powerful than Modi1

Only "natural generated T cells" are activated by the cancer

by the vaccine

sorry