Member Info for KonarA

Thanks for that jb7070.

So it looks from the timeline on page 29 that SCOV2 will be released to clinics before the end of this year, and if we get the safety data from SA then the trial could be approved to start very shortly after. I hope scancell have the logistics of a trial ready to go so that they can hit the ground running if/when MHRA approval comes in.

Actually, re-looking at that graphic on pg 16, arm 3 does seem to be inline with months 4 and 5 if you consider the orange bar. That suggests that they are looking to run the SCOV2 injections in the UK and SA at the same time around February?

Points of note from me:

Modi 1 clinical trial - Ethics and HRA approvals obtained in October 2021
Covidity UK arm - the timeline has the UK branch coming off at 3 months - does anyone who attended know if this indicative of when they anticipate to start in the UK, or if it is just a lazy graphic?

with all due respect.. that last post is complete nonsense and nothing more than you trying to back out of the fact that you did not know Scancell had sold a product.

https://www.scancell.co.uk/scancell-sells-antibody-pipeline-to-peptech

It's been a long time coming, but the start of the scib1 trials remains hugely significant imho.

Having the two trials running in parallel, in both infectious diseases and oncology, will hopefully demonstrate the immense versatility of the immunobody platform.

Whilst we could (and possibly will) license out single products from the platform, anyone wanting to buy the platform outright is going to have to pony up for the full potential. Success in both of these trials adds many many multiples to that number.

"Let’s call the new A+B =C as it’s a new regime of treatment by adding a new drug."

A + B does not equal C. It is A + B. You still have to pay for A + B.

"C is achieving the 30% successful outcome in a much shorter time" - that is a superior response

non inferior may be a factor when comparing medication A with Medication B where B offers advantage in terms of safety and cost..

But comparing A+B with A is never going to offer a cost or safety benefit. A+B has to be superior to A in order to warrant the inclusion of B.

Resolution 4 at the EGM held on june 15th 2021:

"All previous acts and deeds, of the Board of Directors of the Corporation is hereby confirmed,
ratified and approved thereof."

This was voted for by minority shareholders.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04186-8

Thanks for the ongoing research JohnnyB1. its obvious that you put a good amount of effort into your research and always share it with the board - its appreciated.

Do you have any thoughts (or is there any evidence) for when CEPI may announce their funding for 2nd generation vaccines?

I believe day 29 was today. The patient is dosed on "day 1" which was at the latest the 5th October. The second dose is then due ON day 29, which would be the 2nd November.

You could also argue that the reason for rejection of the sputnik vaccine (adenovirus based vaccines in HIV positive patients) is argument for a pressing need for a DNA vaccine.

over 6 weeks since this commitment from Bromley - buess he is not interested in countering the "misinformation"

that is incorrect

Whether the other producers did or didn't is somewhat irrelevant. For a major pharmaceutical company like Astra Zeneca, who run numerous parallel clinical trials in many indications, with huge existing revenue streams and a market cap in many billions.. then FPD is less materially significant. As such, there would be less of a need to issue an RNS. For Scancell, the opposite of which is all true, then FPD is a major step in the company development, and would therefore warrant an RNS. The Nomad will have advised on this.

"I must try and remember there are some very sensitive souls here!" - its not about sensitivity, it was my opinion on your post. Don't make this my problem.

I could not disagree more. FPD is hugely significant, particularly for a small biotech that hasn't been in the clinic for over 6 years, and on that basis alone it warranted an RNS. I am sure Scancell will have taken advice from their advisors on the need to issue an RNS. Furthermore, having good communication with your shareholders is hugely beneficial, and should be encouraged, and not seen as a weakness.

Your whole post reads as a pretty poor attempt to try to belittle both the company and the shareholders.

The thought had crossed my mind - yes. Seems like someone uploaded it too early.

...and there we have it

Clinicaltrials .gov wesite defines start date as "The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "estimated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date."

Scancell Covidity Trial - Estimated Study Start Date : September 2021