We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Yep great news Toatie and so pleased for you and hope the tablets( presume an ACE inhibitor or vasodilator ) will do the trick mate.
Morning EE,
There is value in releasing papers which give out more detail but more important imo to have it appear in a peer reviewed article and that does lengthen the timeline somewhat.
Afternoon,
No more comments on SCLP results but this paper demonstrates they certainly have the correct approach.
https://t.co/9caBl3g2xA
Bermuda totally correct regarding TD valuation.Any broker will use standard metrics for consistency and then they will add caveats such as cautious and conservative estimates to underpin their approach.
They can’t base any valuation on potential as they use a risk adjusted DCF model to establish a comparative appriach.You can just imagine how much credence any “ valuation” would have if it was based on subjective comments expressed by say the CEO.
That is why the other value model chosen is peer valuation which is likely to be more subjective as it reflects what someone us actually prepared to pay.
But of course it is difficult to get direct peer comparisons. Based on LD credibility and comments personally I believe that the standard risk models do not apply to SCLP say on Modi trial and that is where we as individuals may see additional value and can gain value where we see the gap.
However as individuals we all have different judgements on value from the TD approach based on standard metrics to a range of above standard metrics to the ridiculous imo approach of some who claim no. No risk at all.
Morning Konar/EE,
Consider both your posts contain valid points imo in that you would expect the mRNA Vax like most current ones to elicit a much greater nAB response than Covidity as they concentrate on the SGP whereas as Konar says we dint know the full facts of the T Cell response and in particular generated by the NCAP as we know that is the most anticipated response.
Whilst Konar does make the valid point about Omicron specific comparisons as EE says a peer reviewed paper is necessary to provide wider validation of the results.
They are very positive results but once again wider judgements about how positive they are related to other Vax again I think we need to await more validation by peer review or a commercial deal.
Remember and this is the main reason why I consider a partner deal is not imminent is that as 2 RNSs have now said the competitive landscape has totally changed and you have to ask why a partner would invest some £80-100m as a minimum unless the SCLP Vax offers proven promise of having a unique USP say as either a Universal Vax or superior booster over current abdand current a Vax in development that it can then develop as a commercial success.
That is what I think is missing from the RNS so no “ delighted comments on results from SCLP or any reference to ongoing partner discussions after probably well over a year of “partner searching”.
Have not looked at RNS feed and would be very happy to have egg in my face if a partner deal is announced
Evening WF,
The Covid Vax trials were very positive as per the RNS comments though I do attribute a lot more intrinsic value to the validation of Avidmab and needle free for wider purposes than specifically for the Covid results.
I merely point out I consider it extremely difficult to draw any definitive conclusions about the Vax being superior to other current Vax based on the info contained in the RNS.
As for needing a partner SCLP have been saying this was the strategy for over a year now so no surprise about current statement.
As with any phase 1 it is much more about safety than efficacy and the confirmation of a partner deal, which I have already said I don’t expect,due to current environment, but hope to be proved wrong.
Thanks fir opportunity to clarify my position.
Absolutely Ray we know it is the S GP that is the main source of the nAB response and that is in common with most of current Covid Vax and that it is the potential T Cell response of both the S and in particular the N which is what is if most interest regarding efficacy.
My main point remains is with such small cohorts and the varying populations and lack of additional Ig data then it is very difficult to evaluate exactly how positive the results are compared to current Vax.
Evening Ruck,
As you say such extremely low cohorts make the drawing of too many conclusions and especially comparative ones.
You put an extra layer on there of saying the majority of the AB response seems to have come from the Spike GLycoprotein rather than the N protein and that is the main benefit of using the SCLP Vax as compared with the others.
Akso no mention of exact nature of AB response so again hard to draw any meaningful conclusions from current data
Yes Crumbs it is the most clinically developed platform and a few years back RG assigned value of SCLP as being 90% IB and 10% Modi but a lot has changed since then.
I just think it has been surpassed by Modi and in fairness by other technologies in the interim.We all know the compelling results of SCIB1 but no commercialisation and yes if the Combo trial proves very successful then it could open up another opportunity but we need to wait for the results before getting too excited.
The making of the Covid Vax has proved very beneficial to SCLP in proof of concept of IB I as an infectious disease platform/ the proof of Avidmab and needle free route of admin and at a relatively low cost due to Innovate grants etc and of course was initiated at a time of great need.
However the world has moved on and the competitive landscape changed both in Covid Vax and in oncology And SCLP have made the correct strategic decision imo.
I don’t think a partner will materialise but that is purely by own thoughts and I would be delighted to be proved wrong but there was nothing in the RNS to make me more confident in that assessment but the learnings from the trial to SCLP will prove very beneficial imo
Morning Ruck,
You are absolute correct re your comments about a partner which we know has been the intention from SCLP from a considerable time ago so but as well as providing the funding to develop the product it is the external validation of the results that us perhaps the most important aspect.
We know these are positive results but most are based on small cohorts and there have been so many changes to the trial protocol it is difficult to independently draw any major conclusions certainly on efficacy but safety seems well established so that is very good.
As SCLP has said the Covid landscape has changed considerably so the bar will have been raised re attracting a partner imo.As SCLP have said the pivotal conclusion from the RNS is the proof of Avidmab and needle free working well and the implications for the oncology and potential ID uses and that is a huge positive for SCLP.
Still think it is the Modi outcome that will largely determine the future here with the added excitement of the Glycan assets rather than IB but very happy to be proved wrong on that.
Morning Burble,
Was always advised to never mention the monkey on trips to Hartlepool but a funny story if unkind.
Minor never heard of Sand dancers but wrong side of river for me but Marston Rock and great fish and chips were always good reasons to visit S Shields
No worries Bermuda and sure there will be lots of interest in successful Modi results but like yourself think it is much more likely to come from elsewhere rather than likes of Merck
Hi Bermuda/Kashdog
Don’t think RM are in anymore but have not trawled through whole list
https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/mrk/institutional-holdings
Afternoon,
Chester as you say interesting to hear of Bion Tech interest in Moditope as strategically and culturally it is much more of a natural fit than some if the usual other suspects mentioned
Thanks Avi8r