Member Info for RayPointer

Snap moon!

5 million is 0.5 percent of 1 billion.

Extra maths lessons for you after school 🤣

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

1) Isn't this a presentation from at least 12 months ago?

2) Where has the £455k gone to?

3) Slide 6 does not show Ambrose employees, Ambrose does not have any employees from their accounts filed up to March 2025

A foreign beach preferably, not shivering on a UK beach trying to predict when the sun will next appear

Yes, I have realised my mistake.

I wonder what the timing of such a possible investment would be?

I'm thinking Genmab may want to await early clinical results on at least the first mAb before considering such an investment.

On the other hand, the longer they wait for clinical results may have the affect of increasing the price for a given %age ownership. Scancell will continue to look for further mAbs and they are also getting SC134 ready for the clinic. The early clinical results may also attract other investors.

Its an interesting situation in that we already know, from earlier evaluation agreements, that other pharma may also be showing an interest.

Ah yes, thanks for that moon.

I hadn't thought about Scancell selling a portion of GT to say Genmab.

That kind of makes a mockery of our friend scinv's (gone but not forgotten) view that any investment into GT would dilute shareholders.

It's a shame he's not around to respond with a page full of emojis.

Empty, have I misunderstood you here?

Surely an investment into GT must stay within GT and not be used to fund anything other than the development of the Glymab platform.

And maybe not the only poster who works for them

" But this is not a "probability" it is proportion (%),"

"Though technically it, when so many patients are censored, it is probability"

Make your mind up mate🤣

Scinv's posting history may fit the theory that he is a disgruntled ex-employee of Scancell. Who knows?

"If they listened to me 2 years ago and only focused on scib1...."

Https://scancell.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Scancell-iSCIB1-strongly-improved-outcomes-in-Late-Stage-Melanoma-SCOPE-study-results.pdf

Slide 8 clearly states what the exclusions are.

I don't see why he is making all this fuss about something that is clear to anybody studying the results.

How can it be fraud when everything of relevance is clearly stated.

It's funny but I thought all the charts presented showed all patients including the ones that progressed.

The other standout is the PFS gap between current SOC and SCIB1/iSCIB1+ widens with time.

As I understand it, CPIs do not have a memory response so this would explain the widening gap.

So that 20% gap should increase with time.

Interesting that Lindy's team had already predicted which HLA types would not respond

"my yesterday was will Avidimab be in the Glymab Therapeutics ltd or still held by Scancell group ? opinions "

That's a good question CW. My guess is no, Avidimab will not be in GT.

As Lindy has stated, potentially Avidimab could make any mAb more potent, not just Scancell's glymabs.

Also, it is being used in Immunobody vaccines. If the iSCIB1 data is markedly better than the SCIB1 data, that would only reinforce the argument for not including it in GT. IMO of course.

It might be difficult to find data on T Cell responses based on the N-Protein from a different vaccine as a comparison to Covidity.

As I recall, most, if not all of the successful vaccines concentrated only on the Spike protein.

Suffice to say, Scancell kept the so-called scam going by including Avidimab in both iSCIB1+ and iSCIB2+ 🤣

I suppose there is always a first time for anything

With all the projects Scancell have in progress currently, and possible new projects starting up, it would seem a logical step to employ a Program Manager.

I don't think this recruitment should be specifically linked to a follow-on to the current Scope trial.

Https://soundcloud.com/citelinesounds/phil-lhuillier-scancell-ceo-on-the-latest-developments-in-cancer-vaccines

About 11 minutes into the presentation Phil mentions the affect Avidimab is having in iSCIB1+:

a) increased binding to the CD64 receptor

b) resultant increase in potency of the activated TCells and also the immune memory

I suppose Phil must be lying since our resident scientist says that this is not possible 🤣