Member Info for RayPointer

Perhaps for the early days of the Modi1 trial the readings from the Lindy smileometer will be the best indication of success.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196775/coronavirus-vaccine-team-secures-funding-move/

Imperial received the first funds on 17 April and they had been testing on animals since early Feb (2 and a half months after first animal tests)
It might give us a rough benchmark for when Scancell will receive funding.

Mellman did ring but the phone was engaged.

I very much agree with what you say Konar.
The fact that they do not appear to want to do pre-clinical deals on their 2 main platforms shows they have confidence in their success in trials.
For Avidimab they took the pragmatic approach that taking 3 platforms into clinical trials was a bridge too far. So, they let it be known that they were looking for pre-clinical deals and 3 collaborators showed up.

3.45PM must be a clever person
When will he/she post?

For the 2 main platforms
What will be worth more?
a) a pre clinical deal and maybe no more dilution
or
b) a placing followed by a post clinical deal

I suppose the ideal would be an Avidimab deal before funds are required, but that looks less likely as 2020 progresses.

I think they changed it to H1 2020 some time ago.
I suppose when you are having big problems in manufacturing you cannot predict exactly when these will be resolved.

But not a bad thing to worry about Ruck

Cars, my sentiments exactly.
You begin to worry when something takes over 18 months to manufacture.

I agree with Konar. The % increase is 900%.
If you go from 1 to 2 the % increase is 100%
1 to 3 200%
1 to 4 300%
......
1 to 10 900%

Also toxicology studies now completed

Progress in manufacture is the important part of this RNS. The 3rd conjugate has been manufactured.
Clinical supplies ready by Q3 2020.

"In January 2020, the Company provided an update on progress towards initiating the Modi-1 Phase 1/2 clinical trial. This has been advanced further with successful completion of GMP drug substance manufacture for all three of the conjugates that comprise the Modi-1 product. Importantly, the technical challenges reported in January concerning one of the peptide components have been successfully resolved, enabling progression to GMP drug product manufacture and formulation of clinical supplies in Q3 2020."

Hi Bermuda

I interpreted as meaning that there are 3 period

a) 8 years after which the data must be released
Also data for another indication can be introduced during this period
b) 10 years applies to marketing a drug, a hybrid cannot be introduced during this period
c) An extra 1 year is granted if data for they new indication is introduced during the first 8 years

Bermuda

Data exclusivity and market protection

If I am reading this correctly a medicinal patent is guaranteed 10 or 11 years protection from first marketing.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/presentation/presentation-data-exclusivity-market-protection-orphan-paediatric-rewards-s-ribeiro_en.pdf

"‘(…) medicinal products for human use which have been
authorised in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation
shall benefit from an eight-year period of data protection
and a ten year period of marketing protection, in which
connection the latter period shall be extended to a maximum
of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years,
the marketing authorisation holder obtains an authorisation
for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during
the scientific evaluation prior to their authorisation, are held to
bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with
existing therapies.’"

IMO, a big pharma could quite easily extend the period of the patent to 11 years from first marketing.

I also seem to remember that the patent was good for 10 years in Europe with a possible 1 year extension.
This is from the date it is first marketed.

Many thanks Konar and Bermuda.
The important thing is that the patent looks like it will finally be granted.
Good for Scancell and good for the lawyers.
Am I right in saying that just leaves the US patent?

I think you will find that the wording of the original "Intended for grant" patent talked about proteins as moditope targets rather than epitopes (or peptides) which are strings of amino acids within a protein (not the whole protein).
So Lindy objected to this wording since it was inaccurate.
It sounds like she may have got her way.

Assuming we get the good results for the SCIB1/Keytruda trial, it is not just Melanoma that comes into the equation.
It is the principle that High avidity TCells in combination with a CI is possibly setting a new standard in the treatment of a number of cancers.
The High Avidity TCells caused by dual presentation and a careful selection of targets by Lindy is what matters i.e. Immunobody.

The same platform is being used for SCIB2.
The same platform is under investigation for other cancers.
The same platform is being used for SN11. How will the Covid19 virus react faced with a barrage of high avidity TCells? Obviously we have to wait and see and the project will badly need finance.

But the point I am making is that a successful SCIB1/Keytruda trial is more evidence for the effectiveness of the Immunobody platform.