Member Info for RayPointer

Generally, for a small biotech, I think having a lab to do their own discovery and pre-clinical work is a good idea.

It saves time and money.

However, Val never seem to publish their work, making it available to a much wider scientific audience.

They never attend conferences and present their work. That in itself seems suspicious to me.

It makes you think that they have nothing of any worth to publish or present. Alternatively, they haven't got what it takes to develop , present and publish to gain the attention of big pharma.

It also explains why only the likes of THX and Ambrose show any interest in Val's products.

Having to pay for willing blood donors?

WTP

The seller is very smart because he clearly sees the imminent collapse of Scancell's labs which are no longer holding strong.

The wet weather is much more of a threat to Scancell, with relentless rain pouring down on those flimsy cardboard structures. The 50k seller is very smart.

It's good news, but I notice that the first expected reporting of iSCIB1+ results has now slipped to Q4 2024 whereas previously it was Q3 2024.

A good example of why Scancell do not promise anything. 😂

Torquay

Lindy's comment of 90% was about the probability of SCIB1 achieving an overall response rate of 70% i.e., one of the endpoints Lindy had set for the trial.

This probability was quoted after the results from 11 patients were RNS'ed

Is this a poorly disguised dig at Suzy?

What an amazing time for a pump and dump operation.😄

I wonder what Scancell are currently up to with Avidimab.

https://www.scancell.co.uk/Data/Sites/1/media/publications/posters/kaira-et-al-2022.pdf

"Future work

validation in other immune co-agonists that rely on clustering for activity and/or

checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) that rely on increased residence time"

The remark on increased residence time for CPIs is interesting. Some of the CPIs must be getting towards the end of their patent life. No doubt big pharma will have ideas about how to extend the patents. However, if Scancell were to prove that Avidimab could enhance the effect of CPIs and , as a bonus, extend the patent life, that may be very attractive to them.

"herself" not "itself"

😂

Exactly chester.

Lindy itself thinks it could benefit any mAb.

It may be that Scancell's current strategy for Avidimab is to just let the evidence accumulate when Avidimab is used in combination with other agents.

Avidimab had its first outing with the Covidity trial. It may be impossible to measure the effect of Avidimab in this trial, since there was no cohort without Avidimab.

The SCIB1 and iSCIB1+ trial may give a better indication of the effect Avidimab has.

It's worth bearing in mind how Avidimab came about. When Gylcans mAbs were humanised, they lost the ability to bind to their target. Lindy's team then worked to find what it wat in the mouse mAb that gave the strong binding. Once isolated, this was added to the humanised mAb and, hey presto, the humanised mAb regained strong binding.

Genmab will be one company that will be well aware of Avidimab. Possibly they are the most likely to add Avidimab to one of their own mAbs in development and be the first to execute an Avidimab deal.

We all hope that the first such deal is the prelude to an avalanche of deals

Morning bojo

You make the point:

"Conclusion: Avidimab needs its own trials. It could prove itself to be a successful mab in its own right;"

It is not possible to trial Avidimab on its own since it is an addition to a mAb not a mAb in its own right.

When added to an existing mAb, it heightens the chances of the existing mAb to bind to its target.

Could be the pumpers and dumpers have just surfaced after a heavy session last night 😂

"Uncontrolled" means there is no control arm to the trial. For example, in the case of SCIB1 with the two CPIs, there is no cohort with just the 2 CPIs without SCIB1. Such a trial can also be randomised so a patient, once recruited, is randomly chosen to go into either the SCIB1 + 2 CPIs cohort or the control cohort (2 CPIs only).

But there are different types of control as described below

https://www.bioclever.com/controlled-and-uncontrolled-clinical-trials-n-40-en

Let's say the SCIB1 + 2 CPIs cohort ends up with the 85% success that has currently been achieved.

If you couple that with the previous success in the adjuvant setting, then big pharma are bound to show strong interest IMO.

Of course, big pharma will also study each patient's previous reaction to the 2 CPIs alone in order to see if there is any possible bias in patient selection. Again IMO.

That Moderna guy must be getting a little worried methinks

"nick’s just having a laugh at @pms expense"

Yes Porky, I suspected the same.

What have you been smoking Nick?😂

I'm sure that Ambrose Healthcare would be willing to take CLX on for the price of a few more Ambrose shares.

I would expect Scancell and Genmab to have frequent conversations and so Scancell will know exectly at what stage the SC129 development is at.

But both parties will have to agree when to update the market.

All IMO.

Another explanation is that the new development manager does not have the same in depth experience in regulatory submissions that Sally Adams obviously had.