Member Info for PhilBanks

Even if the results were half as good as the first cohort then it's still far better than anything else that's currently under development or on the market. If the results from the next cohort can repeat the same success it would be absolutely sensational.

The presumption is therefore perhaps that as the build progresses and the perceived risk is reduced, the secured bonds can be issued against the RCF at more attractive rates, thus reducing the interest owed and the cost of borrowing. CF said in his interview with the FT that he is highly confident that the initial bonds will receive a B rating (not sure what that equates to in interest rate terms), but as we get closer to production, the subsequent bonds may be issued at a BB or BBB rating etc etc.

I guess the original ST2 funding was going to be based on having to pay interest on a flat B rating (or worse) for the full amount borrowed, and when CF and the finance team did the maths this was found to be a very expensive way of financing the debt, and if any delays to the construction occurred, may have posed a more significant risk of default as we would be racking up debt and interest with no immediate form of income.

The RCF means we are drawing down smaller levels of debt as and when we need the money, and have the ability to significantly reduce interest payments, as the perceived risk of default is gradually reduced as certain construction milestones are achieved.

At least that's my take anyway.

Made a little spreadsheet to try and work out the approximate timings of follow-ups and results. I struggled to find a definitive start date for the treatment of the 1st patient of cohort 1 (of Phase 2a), but believe it to be around the middle of Dec 2018.

Based on the timings of various announcements, I estimate patients 2 and 3 were treated around 27th Jan 2019, with the first follow-up around the 13th Feb 2019 and the results announced to the market on the 20th Feb 2019. The second follow up was around the 14th April 2019, with the results announced on the 26th April 2019.

We know the 2nd cohort of patients (of Phase 2a) began treatment around the 18th March 2019, so by my reckoning the first follow-up should be around 17th May 2019, with the results reported around 24th to 27th May 2019. Obviously a few assumptions built in here, but should hopefully be getting an RNS in around 3 weeks, or by the end of May at the latest.

As jaytee says, Look North - skip to 8m10s (assuming the link works)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0004tdf/look-north-north-east-and-cumbria-evening-news-02052019

Had the same problem, so restarted my phone and it worked fine.

A little bit more coverage here:

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/eurobiotech-report-az-transgene-bicycle-ipo-alentis-round-reneuron-and-trial-transparency

Just goes to show the odds of success for a small research/development pharma. Hopefully backed a winner with this one, certainly looking very promising right now.

Luxturna is the only product that Sparks appear to have on the market currently, but they do have a decent few others in phase 1 and 2 trials.

http://sparktx.com/products/

I've done some research to look into companies that are treating RP, to see what stage they are at and how the treatments are performing in comparison to Reneuron's hRPC treatment. Let me know what your thoughts are and tell me if I've missed any other notable treatments or companies out.

Luxturna (Company - Spark Theraputics)

Pros: FDA approval and now in use following phase 3 trials

Cons: Phase 3 trials changed the stated endpoint as the visual acuity (the standard method of judging the performance of the treatment) was not giving the expected results.

Treatment only works on one gene mutation, which is equivalent to approximately 1-2% of the market.

Other info: company currently under takeover offer for $4.3b

HORA-PDE6B (Company – Horama)

Pros: Has raised $17m funds for clinical trial

Cons: Treats only one gene, that effects around 5000 people in US and Europe. No news since announcing the funding in September 2018.

jCell (company – jCyte)

Pros: Uses stem cell injections to the back of the eye, and is therefore non gene-specific, and can potentially be used to treat the full market.

Granted orphan drug designation by FDA. Partnered with California Institute of Regenerative Medicine.

Has demonstrated a favourable safety and tolerability profile in an ongoing Phase 1/2a clinical trial.

The trials reported in Dec 2017, with visual acuity results indicating a mean improvement of 9 letters at the highest dose (3 million cells) after 12 months.

Now undertaking a phase 2b trial on larger cohort of subjects.

Cons: No further news published on website since Dec 2017.

hRPC (company - Reneuron)

Pros: Granted orphan drug designation by FDA. Uses stem cell injections to the back of the eye, and is non gene-specific, and can therefore potentially be used to treat the full market.

Demonstrated to be safe and tolerable in initial phase 1 studies.

First cohort of 3 patients in phase 1/2a trials were found to have, at most recent follow-up, a mean improvement from baseline in visual acuity of + 23 letters in the treated eye (2 patients at 60 days, and one patient at 120 days).

Next cohort of patients received treatment in mid-March 2019.

Has recently signed a development and licencing deal with Fosun (for greater China area) worth up to $80m (plus royalties when in production).

Cons: Only small sample of results currently available, with further trials required to demonstrate statistical significance and longevity of the treatment.

Thoughts?

Say what?

Not sure if this has been posted already in the midst of the many hundreds of posts, but demonstrates the growing demand for this product.

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/business/17608524.global-demand-for-icl-boulby-mine-sees-30-per-cent-sales-boost/

. . . in for a pound.

It may be more equity than I was hoping for, but I am buying this morning, on the basis of the following facts:

- We now have a fully funded project that eliminates all currently known capital risks.
- The project is now about construction (which is going well and involves the industry leaders in the respective fields)
- The project is backed more than ever by institutional investors, who will have done more due diligence than any private investor willing to buy at this current level
- We have offtake agreements in place for over 10mtpa, which when in production should see revenues of circa $1.5b pa.
- The NPV is around $15b, which shows the significant upside potential that exists for investors who are willing to have some further patience
- If you are buying now, then you are effectively buying at or very near the bottom, a point which the market will fully recognise in the short, medium and long term time frames.

“We expect this seminal achievement to catalyse a major re-rating of the shares, as it is effectively the key to unlocking Sirius’s vast value potential.”

A reminder for everyone what Shore Capital expects when the mine is fully financed:

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/216376/sirius-minerals-tipped-to-more-than-double-in-value-as-financing-nears-216376.html

Yep, been up for an hour having coffee and toast, preparing myself for what is to come. Hopefully a fantastic day for both the company and all LTHs. Very best of luck everyone.

Egg - can you confirm why you think it'll be approx 60 days until the results from the latest cohort? Didn't they receive the treatment around the middle of March? Cheers

Article from 2001 -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-20282/Royal-foetus-research-shares.html

Anyone know if the queen is still invested??

Well done daytona (and other LTHs), 12 years is an impressive amount of time to keep the faith, and it's people like you that deserve everything that this company could offer over the coming months and years. All the best.

Grizzly is literally quoting nothing but fact, I honestly can't see what your issue is top tiger, and I rather think you owe him an apology.

Taverham summarises the point very accurately - the phase 1 initial cohort were tested to essentially evaluate the safety of the procedure (ie no adverse effects etc). They initially test people with the most severely deteriorated vision as, if the procedure was to be adversely effective, then these people have the least to lose (you can't get more blind than completely blind, which is what they were).

Once they've established the proceedure is safe, then they get permission to test it on people who are of very limited vision, but not completely blind. Even on these subjects, they are required to perform the procedure on the most damaged eye, in case anything goes wrong and it makes the vision worse. The procedure has proven extremely successful of this cohort of 3 subjects, and as a result they are now permitted to test it on people with better vision.

The trials are rigorous and very safety conscious, that's why they have to be slowly ramped up and therefore take so long to conclude.

What time (GMT) does the conference start, and do we know if there will be any videos or transcripts available?