Member Info for KonarA

https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03463369?term=trigrid&recrs=ab&rank=4

Ichors IND is approved. There is a trial using it that is already recruiting.

According to CH: "I appreciate the frustration regarding the delay, however, we are actively working on the IND which will be submitted in due course. As you may appreciate there are many components to this submission with some requiring third party input, with Ichor being just one."

i've stated before my belief that CRUK taking on the SCIB2 development was partly to free up Lindy to focus on the Moditope platform.

just noticed something else in that video as 23:50 Lindy starts to say that CRUK have given them �20 million, and then hesitates and re-frames it as "given them a challenge". Was that the sound of a cat getting out of a bag?

@inanaco - No problem. Just thought i had missed some update. No reason to suspect that the other 30 won't be the same though!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zogJ2CCmOxY @12.40 in this presentation

inanaco - have you got a link to that? last update i saw it said only 7 tested.

So on your original point.. there are 30+ known proteins and 4 known methods for modifying those. Sounds like a lot of potential vaccine components there! And of the 7 proteins that they have publicly disclosed as being tested, all have shown anti-tumor effect. It's no wonder that some can see a very very bright future for Scancell!

"Citrullination or deimination is the conversion of the amino acid arginine in a protein into the amino acid citrulline." I knew i had seen arginine somewhere :-)

thanks for posting those, i wasn't too far off with my memory! It may be a question for Lindy at the next public event where she takes questions.

It's a question i haven't thought to ask before now - does the modification have to be the same for all of the proteins in a single vaccine? Or can we use multiples? Is there any benefit in it? Would they work synergistically? So for modi 1 we have three proteins that are citrullinated, but could we include the same proteins modified in a different way (deamination of arginine was one from the original patent iirc)?

I couldn't disagree with you more hotwings. "you've never actually been right, as far as i can see." - is complete nonsense. When inanaco talks about the science i.e. mechanisms of action, targets, benefits of combinations and so on... these are facts. They are indisputable and backed up by the published articles. To state that inanaco has never been right is ignoring the whole scientific foundation of the company, that has been validated by clinical trials and the likes of CRUK and Biontech. To point to the SP as evidence is so myopic as to be almost blind. The moditope patent is such a land grab, that even a fire sale of the IP would likely bring in many multiples of the current SP. Your personal hatred for inanaco shines through in your post. having said all that.. his self-agandissement can be a little wearying! Not even Lindy big's herself up so much and she discovered it!

in a nutshell.. the patent office have notified Scancell lawyers that the patent is granted, but it doesn't formally come into effect until it is published in the European Patent Journal. It is due for publication on the 13th June.

Yup, its a steep upward valuation on getting moditope into the clinic and immunobody to phase 2.

I'd just politely agree to disagree with you.

Withholding information would be doing the deal and not telling the market. Not doing the deal and not telling the market is.. nothing.

How is that manipulation? The BoD are entitled to execute a business deal on any timetable that suits them. They just have to keep it confidential until they do, and disclose it when they do.

You can hold of putting the signature on the deal if you want to time the disclosure.

Couldn't agree more. Said that on the day and still think it. The only rationale i can see for that approach was some legal requirement to allow the BoD to participate.