Member Info for Krone

Surely the purpose of the exercise would absolutely not be to oust Tim or John who are after all the brains of Sareum. Without them and their specialist know how the company wouldn’t exist. The clear message they need to hear and acknowledge is that investors expect a step change in the level of communication across all aspects of the company activity and a greater degree of transparency. I would however support a vote of no confidence in Parker who appears to have done little or nothing to increase shareholder value.

Thoth2 - thanks, much appreciated.

Potnak - why the change of heart?
Thoth - you guys with lots of voting rights should absolutely flex your voting muscles or at least threaten to. I'm not sure it would help us but it would definitely send a message

Given the high profile presentation at ASCO by Professor De Bono and Dr Kristeleit who were fairly effusive in their enthusiasm for 737, NG comes across as luke warn or even disinterested in the latest RNS. One of Thoth2’s question to the SAR bod should be when will ICR/ Sar take 737 back from Sierra if they fail to secure the non dilutive funding which they are reportedly seeking?

Sierra Oncology to Present at the Wedbush PacGrow Healthcare Conference in New York
- Presentation scheduled for 2:30 pm ET on August 14, 2019 -
VANCOUVER, Aug. 7, 2019 /CNW/ - Sierra Oncology, Inc. (SRRA), a late-stage drug development company focused on advancing targeted therapeutics for the treatment of patients with significant unmet needs in hematology and oncology, today announced that Dr. Nick Glover, President and Chief Executive Officer, will present an overview of the company at 2:30 pm ET on Wednesday, August 14 at the Wedbush PacGrow Healthcare Conference being held in New York.
A live audio webcast and archive of the presentation will be accessible through the Sierra Oncology website at www.sierraoncology.com.
About Sierra Oncology
Sierra Oncology is a late stage drug development company focused on advancing targeted therapeutics for the treatment of patients with significant unmet medical needs in hematology and oncology.
Momelotinib, Sierra's lead drug candidate, is a potent, selective and orally-bioavailable JAK1, JAK2 & ACVR1 inhibitor with a differentiated therapeutic profile in myelofibrosis encompassing robust constitutional symptom improvements, a range of meaningful anemia benefits, including eliminating or reducing the need for frequent blood transfusions, and comparable spleen control to ruxolitinib. More than 1,200 subjects have received momelotinib since clinical studies began in 2009, including more than 800 subjects treated for myelofibrosis. Sierra plans to launch the MOMENTUM Phase 3 clinical trial in the fourth quarter of 2019 to support potential registration of momelotinib on a global basis. Momelotinib is wholly owned by Sierra Oncology and is covered by patents anticipated to provide potential exclusivity to 2040 in the United States.
Sierra is also developing a portfolio of DNA Damage Response (DDR) assets, consisting of SRA737 and SRA141, and is conducting a campaign intended to seek non-dilutive strategic options to support their further advancement.
SRA737 is a potent, highly selective, orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1), a key regulator of cell cycle progression and the DDR.
Tumors with high levels of replication stress become reliant on Chk1 to mitigate the potentially catastrophic consequences of excess genomic instability. SRA737+LDG, a novel drug combination where non-cytotoxic low dose gemcitabine (LDG) acts as a potent extrinsic inducer of replication stress, has demonstrated preliminary clinical efficacy.

Thoth2 - well let’s do it then! I don’t have the technical know how but presumably you and/or others do.

Thoth2 - Absolutely count me in!

Potnak - thanks. What are we to make of Tim’s comment in June ‘We believe there is a clear opportunity to generate significant value for our shareholders over the next 12 months..’

Should we expect Q10 to include details of milestone provision....

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/amgen-s-kras-drug-hits-mark-2-additional-cancers-colorectal-and-appendiceal?

RMM - you may well be right.

RNS suggests that either Sareum’s due diligence was not up to scratch and/or a third party has raised the issue. Thoth2, what’s your view on implications if any?

Thoth2 - thanks. News on Tyk2 can’t be too far off.

Thoth2- thanks. At what point would you think it necessary/expect the bod to take some kind of action to sure up the sp.

Something on the horizon??!

How far down does it have to go before the BOD take some action to assure PI’s that it’s not game over?

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b00444?acsmobile=2.0.3
...In addition to unprecedented JAK isoform and kinome selectivity, 11 shows excellent pharmacokinetic properties with minimal profiling liabilities and is efficacious in several murine models of autoimmune disease. On the basis of these findings, 11 appears differentiated from all other reported JAK inhibitors and has been advanced as the first pseudokinase-directed therapeutic in clinical development as an oral treatment for autoimmune diseases.
Thoth2 - note - 'appears differentiated from all other reported JAK inhibitorsnd has been advanced as the first pseudokinase-directed therapeutic in clinical development as an oral treatment for autoimmune diseases'.
Where does this leave us? Are we lagging behind? Surely we need to see some action very soon or we are in danger of missing the boat?

Just reviewing AGM comments re 1801:
JR: SRI have been involved in all autoimmune disease aspects of the programme…they are focussing wholly on Lupus research at the moment ...they have done some tests on 1801…they have not looked at 1801 in their Lupus model. They have looked at other molecules in their Lupus model, they got a grant from the department of defence specifically to focus on that. They put out an interim report that showed some promising data however they have not finished their studies…yet, so we are really waiting for them to complete that before we put out our press release on the Lupus data.

Q: Do we anticipate that SRI will be involved in 1801

JR: So we are in to the pre-clinical development stage of the project now – they have the potential to contribute to that however I don’t think they have the funding at the moment so we are pursuing that by ourselves at the moment. They are still doing some discovery stage research.

Update awaited......

At the December 2018 a question was asked of Stepehen Parker:

Q: Voter turnout of 7.4% illustrates issues about lack of institutional backing. Can you give any commentary on how you can get institutional investors on board?

Parker's response: I completely agree with the point that people are making that the company will be strengthened immeasurably by having an increased institutional shareholding base, I totally agree and accept that and that is a very large part of the thinking behind the various changes that we have slowly been putting into place. Most visible today being the 2 new non-execs. The point made earlier about increasing credibility with institutions by having a properly constituted board with sub-committees of the board which we are now putting into place is something which institutions rightly pay a great deal of attention to governance issues….
We have been working over time to have both non-deal placement deal meetings with institutions to try to encourage them to look our way and we believe that we are making slow progress but quite demonstrably its not yet tangible but its something we are working very hard on and will continue to do so.

Parker was appointed on 17 May 2016 - Tim siad at the time ' We welcome Stephen to the board, who brings with him a wealth of financial and industry experience which will be crucial to the business as we look towards the next stages of our transformation into a clinical-stage development company.
If Parker is indeed CRUCIAL to the business, based on the evidence to date, we are in trouble.

Thoth2 - so what can be done by shareholders to seek assurances and establish that we aren’t in fact being taken for a ride? EGM to challenge BOD and depending on outcome possibly table motion of no confidence in Parker?

RMM - agreed, in the absence of any tangible evidence to the contrary.