Member Info for ratcliffewriter

They'd only get it if 75 percent of shareholders voted for it....
Big difference between offer and acceptance.

Anyone want to second the motion?

I think Sanofi abandoned their Covid project too. I'm assuming that was first generation effort, but not aware of any developments since.

It would be interesting to see what the same 'prophetic' site would be saying if CRUK was an AIM company - we'd see articles like 'CRUK on the brink? Cash strapped organisation forced to surrender potential blockbuster as funds dry up - CRUK today suffered the humiliation of handing back the SCIB2 drug to Scancell as donations dwindle. This means cash-rich Scancell with its new top-level backers can now keep the entire SCIB platform in house and on SCIB2's return can start to supercharge its potential efficacy with the aid of their Avidimab science which has been developed since their now-terminated agreement with CRUK over 2 years ago.'
I suggest that paragraph is probably a lot closer to the truth than the take by TW and his minions. But like all journalists, they never let the truth get in the way of a good headline.

RP - basically, yes. But you flatter him. Anyway the usual pattern as has happened on selected occasions before, is that there's always room for someone close to ask him to put in a word (good or bad, depending on the intent) and make a little 'feature' to try to put pressure on a share price, usually downwards. I'm sure no money or favours change hands, after all such behaviour would be utterly devoid of integrity. Nice to be able to join the dots between a few of the names that appeared here today in the light of this. (As if it wasn't fairly obvious anyway, but every little helps, as they say)

I'm saying there are often different ways to interpret a situation. Please try not to be so patronising.

AB you take aim at the situation saying 'I thought Redmile approached the BOD for the additional funds last year? Why? Was it because the BOD were too reticent?', but by the same token it could be argued that being approached is a sign of someone looking in the 'shop window' (or maybe into the workshop more correctly) and liking what they see. Had the board said they approached Redmile then it could equally be said 'they went cap in hand in desperation', so a negative and a positive can be put either way, it just depends on one's perception.

The SCIB2 movement to and from CRUK looks to be principally economic - although CRUK took it on because they could see potential in it (why else would they?) and SCLP did not have the funds to do anything with it. I remember the fact it was seen as saving about 5 million pounds that we just didn't have at the time. Now the boot is on the other foot, CRUK are short of funds and Scancell isn't, and so it has returned - unless of course there have been scientific developments at SCLP that make SCIB2 more desirable to have back. OK you can argue that if it would be good if CRUK would have hung on to it, but then SCLP has Avidimab to think of combining with it, and I guess the SCIB platform has been further researched and worked on in general. But fundamentally this is a matter of economics imo, and CRUK having to prioritise. Scancell now have more scientific knowledge to make SCIB2 potentially either better in house or more attractive to a potential partner (an oft-used and very vague term on AIM I know!) and they have a higher profile and arguably better contacts after the Redmile investment. The thing we don't know is were CRUK obliged to return it, did they want to hang on and develop it when they could, did they want rid of it, have they done anything with it, was SCLP obliged to take it back, did they want to have it back to make more of it, will it be kept on the back burner while other projects develop, or will it be advanced now it is back where it was born? There are enough different opinions here that you can pick your own permutation from the above and just wait and see.

Was anyone NOT expecting this announcement?

Steady now! Anything approaching a balanced view to include comments about CRUK's financial problems, or the development of Avidimab, or Scancell's financial strength, or conjecture on the possible resumption of cancer trials will be met with a robust series of posts from the Cosy Club of Doom.

'The company involved'? That's one. Knowlesi said 'Many other firms..... some already in clinical trial.' So unless you can name 'many' it appears that the great caller out of liars is.....a liar.

Serious question knowlesi - you said 'Many other firms also looking to target the S & N proteins - some already in clinical trial.'
Names please.

So who else is targeting the S and the N proteins out of interest. This mutation news is starting to look ever more concerning so it would be good to follow anyone in that arena - a few names to research would be most appreciated. Good that Scancell has its patents firmly in place anyway - anyone able to give details if any competing patents exist?

WTP - the SCIB1 trial was stage 3 and 4 metastatic melanoma, so early cells is right at the other end of the scale, and in the field of prevention rather than 'treatment of established.'
The net casts wider - was it for this the sort of expansion that LD wanted the extra funds from Redmile last autumn, and why she was apparently so very keen that it be approved?

But you are still invested here I presume?

Don't forget Scancell's potential in cancer therapy - combining the 2 blockbusters looks like a retrograde step.
From Seeking Alpha this morning -
Merck’s Keytruda with Yervoy fail to add clinical benefit in non-small cell lung cancer
Jan. 30, 2021 11:49 PM ETMerck & Co., Inc. (MRK)By: Dulan Lokuwithana, SA News Editor6 Comments
Merck (NYSE:MRK) said that its anti-PD-1 therapy Keytruda in combination with ipilimumab (Yervoy®) failed to improve overall survival (“OS) compared with Keytruda monotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”).Based on Phase 3 KEYNOTE-598 study, Keytruda/ Yervoy combo had shown 21.4 months of median OS compared to 21.9 from Keytruda monotherapy (HR=1.08 [95% CI, 0.85-1.37]; p=0.74) in patients with metastatic NSCLC whose tumors express PD-L1 (tumor proportion score [TPS] =50%) without EGFR or ALK mutations.In terms of progression-free survival (“PFS”), the median PFS was 8.2 months for those receiving the combo versus 8.4 months for those in the monotherapy arm (HR=1.06 [95% CI, 0.86-1.30]; p=0.72).In the study involving 568 patients, 76.2% of patients developed treatment-related adverse events in Keytruda/ Yervoy arm vs 68.3% in those who received the monotherapy.“The results are clear – the combination did not add clinical benefit but did add toxicity,” commented Roy Baynes, senior vice president and head of global clinical development, chief medical officer, Merck Research Laboratories.

Also, imo if it were in any way indiscreet it would not have been retweeted by Scancell.

Interesting it was put out well after close of business on a Friday night. I cynically pondered if it were an optimistic result of a 'relaxing evening', but sclp retweeting it gives it an interesting twist.

Given that dummy sells weren't going on auto at 14 at the close, I'd suspect its a buy. But in the crazy world of share dealing, anything is possible. We'll probably get a clearer idea at 8am on Monday!

Interims are by their nature predominantly a summary of known facts, with some forward-looking points, so most of us could probably have written 75 percent plus of this morning's rns. What does stand out in the summary is the size of the cash raise and the quality of the new investors. Other points of interest are the fact that the 'Cosy Club of doom' didn't even post until into the afternoon, and the best they could come up with was a limp each way bet to allow future cherry-picking to prove 'correct predictions.'
A reassuring day.