Member Info for RayPointer

I've forgotten what a 69 is. Is it an ice cream?

Chester
Don't forget to post your location before you jump into the black hole!

If the research shows VAL is well ahead of the opposition that is good.

If the research shows VAL is at best keeping pace or is behind that is also good.

Any research, good or bad, helps people make an informed decision and is also there to be debated.

The post that Noise made about Keytruda is a good example.

Chelsea
If I find time I will go through each GC entry and compare to project blueprint.
Might be this weekend.

Further dilution depends on
1) Whether we get a deal or deals with BionTech, the timing and the upfront amount
2) The initial success of trials.

I believe we have cash to last us into some point in 2020.

Agreed deadly
In the unlikely event of a defeat, £20 million would be chickenfeed to Genentech but would there be strings attached?

Excellent cream
You win the tiebreak

Has anyone noticed the phrase "in the first instance" in the CRUK press release about SCIB2.
It suggests there may be more funded trials to come.
We know that Scancell have always said that SCIB2 could possibly be used to target other cancers.

http://commercial.cancerresearchuk.org/scancell-and-cancer-research-uk-collaborate-advance-novel-cancer-immunotherapy-clinical-trials

Under the terms of the Clinical Development Partnership, Cancer Research UK will fund and sponsor a UK-based Phase 1/2 clinical trial of SCIB2 in combination with a checkpoint inhibitor in patients with solid tumours, focusing on NSCLC in the first instance.

I too think that we will win first prize in the GC.

My reasons are different

1) It is another step in Lindy's ambition to cure all cancer
2) The mediocrity of the opposition in comparison to project blueprint

Noise

Did you know that in 2019 it is expected that there will be over 1000 combo trials with CIs.
Mind boggling!
How many are for prostate cancer?

The bar set by CIs is not particularly high so there are opportunities there for companies like VAL to make an impact.

The bar might be low but CIs are earning huge sums for big pharma. Hence the scramble to prove the worth of other treatments in combinations with CIs.

The fact that 201 shows no serious side effects is IMO a plus.

That's great Noise.
Keep analysing the opposition and posting.
There needs to be a constant watch on the opposition.

Val isn't a football team.
It is good that you research the opposition.

As for posting your research, that is entirely up to you.

You are still not talking about the opposition.
Compare 201 to what other companies are doing.
Is Val ahead of the game and, if so, by how much?

There will be many competitors, large and small.
It took me a few minutes of research to discover that one of your competitors is Merck with Keytruda.

However, you are now talking in more detail about the 201 data, which can only be good.

Another question to ask is "are there any peer reviews?".
These are surely more valuable than the views of BB posters including myself.

Thanks Tommy. I will give this a closer look tomorrow.
To me, 201 could be a good defence against prostate by blocking certain molecules. That is why I am interested in the CI comparison. They work in broadly similar ways.

What interests me about 201 is that it may be more effective than CIs. But there again it may not.
So, I stress again the importance of checking out the opposition.

Prostate is not a priority for Scancell but they are working on it.
But here I would rather not talk about Scancell.

I am not invested in VAL but if I was convinced that 201 is superior to CIs then I would consider it.

Noise

I don't want a discussion of SCLP on this BB.
But there really needs to be as assessment of the opposition to VAL's products.
Nobody seems to be doing this.

It stuck me that 201 works in a similar way to CIs, so I naturally thought that a comparison of 201 vs CIs would be worthwhile.

It's only by having such debates that the true worth of the science can be assessed.

An ongoing study combining olaparib with the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab has yielded intriguing data in the first 17 patients. Of this initial cohort, 10 patients (59%) had responses, composed of more than 50% PSA declines or partial responses according to conventional radiographic imaging.13 Responses were seen in all six patients who had identified DNA damage repair mutations, as would be expected.

https://gucasym.org/daily-news/immune-checkpoint-inhibitors-forefront-prostate-cancer-treatment

Possible opposition from CIs

https://www.icr.ac.uk/news-archive/asco-2018-major-trial-is-first-to-show-benefits-of-immunotherapy-in-some-men-with-prostate-cancer

Possibly more serious opposition from Professor Lindy Durrant

http://www.scancell.co.uk/file-manager/publications/current-strategies-to-enhance-anti-tumour-immunity-cook-et-al-2018.pdf

Especially since Lindy is keen to combine Immunobody vaccines with CIs. We should see initial clinical results in 2019 on the 1st combo study.

This is not meant to restart a VAL v SCLP debate. There will be many more competitors to 201 than the 2 I have highlighed.

But surely as holders of VAL you should be spending time researching the opposition

Borgie

Do you know how this compares to trails using CIs such as Keytruda?
CIs would appear to be possibly 201's main competitor.

I make it neck and neck between Cream and Rats.
What happens in the event of a tie?

I didn't know John Chiplin was in politics!