Member Info for Ivyspivey

Looks like could start recruiting very soon so if you work backwards from May 22 estimated end date.You say start recruiting in mid September and do 1st 15 days assessment beginning of Oct so 1st jab mid October and 2nd jab mid Nov.Then 1st booster mid Feb and 2 nd booster mid March.Six week post 2nd booster check so end May.Very rough timeline

Looks like could start recruiting very soon so if you work backwards from May 22 estimated end date.
You say start recruiting in mid September and do 1st 15 days assessment beginning of Oct so 1st jab mid October and 2nd jab mid Nov.
Then 1st booster mid Feb and 2 nd booster mid March.
Six week post 2nd booster check so end May.
Very rough timeline

Yep Chelsea.
15 days to process before 1st jab so say end of September then LPO is 6 weeks after 2nd SCOV2 so end date of May 22 is mid point between 28-36 weeks.

That would help to determine

Hi Miavoce that is how I read it that the SCOV2 will be used as a booster 3 months after the primary course(SCOV1) has been fine.
What I don’t know is will the arms be split so half get a booster and half do not or as thought thst eoukdvhelp determine what happens in U.K. trial

Thanks Konar we can keep on checking CT website now

CW I was referring in general to other shares where they are kept within a trading range for some reason..
As far as I am aware only one big player in SCLP which is Redmile.Yes Vulpes have a lot of shares but I see them as more using the situation for their own benefit rather than being the prime instigator or player.

Morning.
Agree AB and Kashdog no doubt the SP has been kept in at trading range but more to suit some big players agenda rather than anything to do with giving LD a helping hand.
It has been going on a long time and as Kashdog MMs may facilitate a big players wishes as long as it is legal and in their interests which does not include doing any CEO a favour.

Morning RR,
Just looking in and very sorry to hear about your situation and sincere BW for the future.

Evening Ted/Jim,Just back from footy and so good to enjoy a normal Saturday afternoon.
Not sure exactly where Jim is coming from but your answer Ted covered main points if Jim is coming from point that if you don’t use all the planned trial volunteers does that mean the contract is worth less.
The contracts are normally all agreed with a specific number of trial patients being inducted at a precise cost so if it takes the CRO for eg hVivo additional volunteers to complete the trial beyond the normal “ wastage” which will be included in the contract then hVivo will bear the cost and vice versa so the contract unless specifically agreed will be to the same value whatever the final numbers.
However the Govt HC contract is unusual as it is not part of a normal regulatory p1/2 as it is so novel and is about discovering more about how the virus behaves so again I would expect that the full value of the contract would be honoured.
It is not like getting extra value by including more trial patients as it would be unethical to subject any additional patients to potential risk.
If Jim’s point is a more general one of does every patient hVivo recruits prove profitable then the answer is no as you said Ted as you get AEs and some patients are unsuitable The normal way of agreeing a contract value and measuring KPIs is revenue per bed which is governed by cost earned per trial and of course occupancy ratio

Morning,Thanks for the comments this morning re RNS,
Dint think any of us begrudge LD any payment that she already had given her unsurpassed contribution here.
She is still hugely aligned to the rest of the SH for the future by both the tie in and the incentive so not really worried about why she did the transaction as it is a personal choice.

CL I do agree about not ending up in pointless arguments but do feel it is worth at least pointing out where you see a clear misrepresentation of the facts as some may have concerns if they are not familiar with this space.
We certainly did a trial ( for an approved product seeking an additional claim rather than as part of a Approval regulatory process) the interim results were so good the independent regulators said you did not require the full trial numbers considered at he onset of the trial.
This was seen as a huge positive in terms of demonstrating the clinical endpoints with a much lower number of participants and if someone had suggested this was a bad thing they would be laughed out the room.

Earache,you patently fail to understand how this trial process operates in that it gets refined in terms of numbers if they nanagevtonachievevthevclinical end points with sufficient statistical analysis.
If you took the time and trouble to read the quotes from Adrian Catchpole and others would are an integral part of trial process that one of the “ stunning” results is the fact that the virus has displayed a commonality that they did not anticipate hence you can end up achieving a concept of proof with fewer trialists.
Having revised the number of trialists downwards is a great achievement as it has achieved the endpoints whilst minimising the risk to all involved.
Funny you seek to always make a negative out of a positive but maybe you just have a different agenda to the LTH here who simply want ORPH to be successful but by following a very transparent and open pathway

Hi Crumbs,
It could be the 2 buyers approached SCLP and it was a way of facilitating the transaction off market by LD selling the shares and then being given new options at the current price but whichever way it happened it is bullish.
She is largely the reason why SCLP has so much compelling science but she is being handsomely rewarded for her efforts and it helps tie her in for the next 3 years.Mind you I don’t think money motivates her primarily but this is a very generous deal assuming that she continues in her UoN capacity.

Evening SZ,
There are a few interesting things happening if you look.
On the CT website the HC characterisation study is now complete and the main study has been updated to say the enrolment has been finished.
The couple of meetings coming up to discuss half year results and then Leicester Meeting.
A change on the Immutex ownership and of course the rich news period promised plus likely new contracts.
A very exciting time indeed.

Hi RR,
Yes good to explore What If scenarios and in an ideal world you would say yes if Modi 1 is proved more successful than Keytruda then the potential is huge and may generate multi billion dollar sales but let us consider a few of the likely parameters.
1. Modi 1 Approval is 5-7 years away and must pass through various regulatory hurdles. The cost of getting to market will be in order if several hundred million pounds.
2. What will the competitive landscape be like in that timeline with likely advances across a whole host of oncology treatments and technologies.
3. If someone offered to buy SCLP for £1bn or £2bn in its entirety in the next 12 months would Redmile and Vulpes who have the power say no we are going to wait another 10 years.
4. Lindy and most of BoD are of an age where they are unlikely to be still with SCLP in another 10 years.

Currently SCLP have an excellent range of novel and exciting platforms protected by the IP and a great chance of doing a series of deals should the dara prove pivotal.This will likely provide all SH with a very healthy return as well as making a big difference to the prospects of patients.
However, these technologies if in the hands already of a Merck would come to fruition in due course but still in case of Moditope would take 10-15 years to achieve what Keytruda is currently doing.In the hands of SCLP it will take longer due to lack of resources.
So the way this works is SCLP prove up and a bigger player takes it forward and people should just accept that.In exactly the same way when RM and Vulpes provide the funding to move forward you cede large elements of control .
This is the way it works and not some romantic dream which some PIs seem to think it works that all you need to do is come up with compelling science,people come with huge amounts of money but just let things carry on as they have historically done.
ATB

Morning Crumbs,
I absolutely accept that should Moditope prove to be as successful or more successful than Keytruda in treating cancer that it will worth a huge amount of money and a massive deal will ensue.I have fortunately been through tremendous growth phases of 2 “ discoveries” which has led to the establishment of big divisions of Merck at the time one producing half of all it’s profits.
My point is not that it can’t happen but it is the length of time,the hurdles that need to be overcome and the huge influence of other factors like the size of the commercial operation needed to realise the full value.
In all likelihood SCLP would be bought out or sold or the IP divested yes for a huge amount but I just want some perspective.
If the likes of Merck truly thought that Moditope was the future and they certainly would have been fully aware of it they would likely have bought into SCLP like they have done with another AIM bio.
They may simply be watching and waiting for the trial results like others and we will have to be patient.But Redmile and Vulpes control the future here for better or worse and it will be sorted before the end of 2022 imo.
It may not be the greatest analogy but you could discover the best new fizzy drink in the world in your back kitchen.It does not necessarily mean that discovery will lead to it being signed up by the big groups like McDonalds and become a rival of Coke or Pepsi.
Yes the scientific world is much more complex and objective but so are the obstacles in terms of how you achieve success.
Be patient and await the trial results on all the platforms and then see what kind of deals can be done and yes it is by nature fun to speculate about future multiples of the current SP as long as people don’t start confusing fantasy with reality and over extend themselves

Evening Crumbs,
Some interesting points made today but I have to point out that is a huge extrapolation to go from a “ compelling” platform but yet to be tested in humans to “ rival the likes of Merck”.
Having worked for Merck for 20 years I think I may know a little about why they have such a huge market cap.
Yes a lot is to do with many different IPs but also a very successful and extensive commercial operation which has helped them achieve their current level of success.
Yes if Moditope proves successful I am sure a great deal will ensue and the SP will be far higher but please let us get just a little perspective

Morning Violin dog,
Given the huge importance of that step I think it will be RNSd and especially with LD now being CEO. I know the trial has been Approved so everything should be soon ready to go and that sometimes FPI is an important but not huge milestone.
However,given the fact it is the first step in humans with a new Vax in a new for Immunobody delivery system etc and let’s be honest chequered history of SCLP in getting actual trials progressed to FPI then I do think it is a critical point which needs official comment.
This new variant mutation which has been highlighted in SA may give a chance for additional validation of the SCLP candidates in the SA trial.

Should be an interesting validation of Covid Vax as a new variant in SA is possibly a worrying development