Member Info for RuckRover

Crumbs, thanks for that. You make a compelling case and relatively succinctly.
The article came out over a year ago, it’s slightly annoying that those slow on the update are benefitting from a lower sp!

Dalester, good post, I think you have said what many here think.

Wild,
Yes, just opinions and speculation. I put it out there as one of the many possibilities. Many here have been caught out by the unexpected - SCIB1 going out of date, placings, not winning the GC, delays to scib1 combo trial etc etc.

It sometimes pays to consider as many possibilities as you can. Maybe ms Durrant wants to return to full time academia. Maybe she is being tapped up by BioNTech or Roche. Perhaps she feels she has a better chance of fulfilling her dream re cancer treatment away from Scancell. Who knows?

Aimho, ATB

Ray, that was in response to your 10.11 hadn’t noticed 2 posts slipped in between

Ray,

Or
Necessity?
Or
Succession planning?

C7, read your (lengthy!) post with interest, agree with it mostly. If I may offer a comment:

Not all investors were disappointed - I wasn't. 1) I didn't think a win was a certainty, and 2) I don't think it would impact us that much financially. The benefits had already been gained - being shortlisted and having the opportunity to build relationships with some real heavy weights in oncology. What I was disappointed about was the impact on the SP, taking us lower than where we before the rise on account of an expected win.

As regards the new recruits, of course it up to Scancell to determine who they need. It may well be that they know where the funding is coming from or they feel it can be funded out of existing funds. An alternative view, if I may offer one, is that they feel they have better chances of getting funding if they pursue the areas of expertise these two have (in addition to what they already have).

As you say, a funny old week but plenty more to come before this has played out I think.

Ray, yes there will tests of some sort.

Ray,

For your information, these are the SCIB1 trial inclusion/exclusion criteria from the trials site:

Inclusion Criteria:
HLA-A2 positive.
Positive for HLA-DR4, HLA-DR7, HLA-DR53 or HLA-DQ6.

Exclusion Criteria:
Prior systemic anti-cancer treatment within four weeks of screening.
Prior treatment with systemic corticosteroids or other immunosuppressants within four weeks of screening.
Treatment with any investigational product within the four weeks preceding screening.

Ray,

On the SCIB1 melanoma trial, patients were carefully selected so that those with the best chance of it working were treated. There is no reason to believe that SCIB2/MODI1 will be any different there?

>but one deal and that's the new car or mortgage paid off , depending on the deal<

or both! (depending on the deal)

Ray, these drugs aren’t like brands of headache tablet, try them all til one works lol
There will be very sophisticated testing to predict who are likely to respond best to alternative treatments. Of course, the prediction may well turn out incorrect so, other treatments could be tried.

I know in many cancer trials, you are not eligible if other treatments have been used, sometimes a time limit since last dose. I’m not sure if this applies to SCIB or MODI

missed a bit of land....

ALL cancers at ALL stages in ALL patients

Ray, I'm not sure what you mean by "big future"? I don't think they see it as the biggest market but possibly as a significant group that can only be treated with "personalised" vaccines.

I do think it is part of a massive land-grab - all cancers in all patient groups. Those that do not need to go the personalised route can be treated cost effectively, but EVERYONE gets treated.

Don’t you have to WIN the final?
Talk about counting your chickens.... lol

C7, just seen this. I wasn’t meaning to be patronising, apologies f it came out that way.

Congrats on the win!

Ok.

Deadly,
Pick out a useful and relevant post from today, give me the poster name and time and tomorrow I will try and post in a similar style and quality.

C7, as I said early, this is lively debate.
If you really want to know you starts the “digging” look at the 16.03 post.
Really sorry that this upsets you, and on top of that Spurs have just scored ATB

So your "pages" of posts "proving" a $1B turnover are all for nothing?

"you really are an idiot ..... sorry but i have no choice but to ignore you"

You spend pages proving a $1B turnover then say Scancell will never get the turnover? And I'M the idiot.

You have more reverse gears than a .........…