Member Info for miavoce

Thanks for the updates Botski and bobbust, sounds so exciting...so much to come over the next two months and all signs are very positive. The new T Cell technology seems to have got them very excited indeed !!

'SC134 is the GlyMab lead asset and has strong potential as an effective therapeutic antibody for small cell lung cancer with in vivo data demonstrating anti-tumour activity as a T cell engager and an antibody drug conjugate. This data has generated strong commercial interest which will be pursued for further investment through the Company’s subsidiary, GlyMab Therapeutics Limited, as well as being considered for partnership opportunities and licensing deals.'

Looks like things are shaping up regarding SC134. Hopefully news on this not too far away.

JB1

the PFS graphs in the presentation are actually showing a calculated future PFS probability based on current PFS data (you'll wee the 'Probability' is the measure on the x axis). There are various statistical methods that can be used to calculate future PFS based on existing data. What the graphs are showing is the forecast level of PFS for when all SCIB1 1 patients have reached 22 months treatment (many have't reached this yet) and when all iSCIB1+ patients have reached 11 months treatment (again, many haven't reached this yet). Unfortunately the slides don't make this very clear. This is why the %ages shown seem odd.

ISCIB1+ looks like it has the makings of a game changer for PFS - that flatlined graph looks pretty compelling. Lindy suggested in the presentation Q&A that it may well be avidimab which is enhancing the response durability. Will be very interesting to see how this evolves of the next few months - hopefully we'll get some PFS updates along the way. Given that PFS will be the primary endpoint for the Phase 3 this is very good news.

As the trial is open label Scancell will have been receiving regular updates from the trial lead. They will have been fully aware of the position throughout the trial IMO and all their public statements will have been made in this context.

Should of course have said '...WITHOUT any of the invested funds being used to support SCIB and MODI. My guess is that Genmab will take a 25% stake in GT for £50m'

IMO the purpose of setting up GT was to facilitate a deal wherein a 3rd party (e.g. Genmab) takes a stake in the Glymab platform and products. The creation of GT lets a 3rd party invest cleanly in the Glymab business with any of the invested funds being used to support SCIB and MODI. My guess is that Genmab will take a 25% stake in GT for £50m.

Dracula1

Step 1 - Great Science

Step 2 - Great Data

Step 3 - Great Deals

The move fstep 2 to step 3 is imminent.

That doesn't make sense to me GF123 as Scancell own GTL. If Scancell didn't own GTL then I could see that GTL would need to pay for the IP, but that isn't the case. Any IP transferred into GTL is still owned by Scancell via their ownership of GTL.

My thinking is that Genmab really like what they are seeing with their first two mAb's and are keen to get their hands on more particularly SC134, but SCLP don't want to part with SC134 at this stage. However SCLP need funds to move SC134 and possibly other mAb's forward. I therefore expect Genmab to take an equity stake in GTL (IMO GTL has been set up to enable this). My guess is that Genmab will buy a 25% stake in GTL for £50m, giving an implied value of £200m for GTL. Not only would this be great for Scancell as they would have the funds to progress SC134, but would also be great for Genmab as:-

1. They get a stake in SC134 plus all other Glymabs

2. 25% of any milestone payments that they make to GTL are effectively 'coming back to themselves' as they will own 25% of GTL (which could eventually exceed the value of their £50m investment.

From a shareholder perspective this should add 20p to the share price IMO.

I'm pretty sure the things will now move quickly regarding funding the Glymab development - the urgency with which the setup of GT was communicate implies to me that things are already happening. Phil seems very focused on moving things forward in the Glymab space so he isn't going to let this drift - I wouldn't be surprised to get funding related news in the next few weeks.

Agree with the point around the funding. The investors in GT will know that any investment will be dedicated solely to Glymab development and will not be syphoned off to SCIB/MODI.

The formation of GT also sends the message that the SCIB/MODI development does not rely on the milestones form the Genmab deals - so funding of the next stages of DSCIB/MODI will come from elsewhere, which will hopefully be payments from deals / partnerships.

One further intriguing point - we normally get at least 1 weeks notice for Investor Meet meetings but in this case we got 1.5 days notice. Seems like it was arranged in a hurry.

Bottom line is that if they are going to say anything meaningful and new it has to be RNS'd first...so eyes open at 7am tomorrow and Wed.

It's only been 8 weeks since the last Investor Meet presentation. There must be something new they want to share with us.

They can back for a 2nd one 2 after having the first for 2 years. I think this says all we need to know regarding whether the 1st one is looking good in their pre-clinical work.

First time, as far as I'm aware, that the cohort 3 results have been described as compelling - all previous references to compelling data have referred to cohorts 1 & 2.

Thanks Bermuda - it also provides further validation of the ability of the glymabs to effectively attach effectively to the Glycan targets.

Next week we enter the probable period for news.

No pharma is going to rule out a deal with SCLP yet. Compelling data will be the deciding factor.