Member Info for sadoldgit

Good morning.

I prefer price not to increase much as have just shy of 200k shares to go into ISA.

Apologies for not getting back to you earlier with regards primates.

2006 was the event period and safety has moved on.

Interestingly the monoclonal antibodies were derived from humans and placed in monkeys.

There was a slight increase in cytokine activity in the monkeys which should have indicated caution but this was ignored.

It may well be that they will use canine.

Be interesting to see what they use as the two species and the results obtained.

A feeling of excitement by many as taken a long time to approach fruition.

Regards

As per the title around 5 pounds a share.

Thoth2 bless him, put 14 pounds a share

We now have twice as many shares.

On phase 2 satisfactory toxicology results l still maintain we worth at least 400 million.

We are around 8 to 9 months away from that.

However at end of toxicology we should have preliminary data shortly after trial completion.

Possible updates too with dosing results.

Not ramping just a positive attitude.

30 days l believe closed period prior to end of year results if l am correct.

Good hit Searle

Another blue day l would expect but reckon may be held back a tad by some sells.

Institutional investors and a few traders

We will see what unfolds.

Aber it is a positive.

Some people will always find fault and snipe.

I wonder what the response would be if he sold 83k shares.

Regards

Goodmoyning Silverfoil.

I would not use the term significant but the term formal discussions

Informal discussions can take place which can lead to formal discussions.

Informal discussions been going on for months.

Regards

In all honesty l don't see a vast improvement.

What l would like to see us timescales that are adhered to. Sarrum been very wishy washy in thus area.

For example in AGM state looking at early in the new year. May is not early in the New Year.

Had an early RNS been released just to say about the importance of toxicology studies they had decided to produce more compound tweaking it to perfection to obtain the best possible toxicology outcome then l believe that would have settled minds here.

Results so far are extremely promising and would expect dosing to exceed equivalent of 12.5 mg per day in humans. It may well exceed this several fold before any undue side affects are noticed.

People often confuse MTD ie maximum tolerated dose with DLT ie dose limiting toxicities.

MTD is associated with risk of death from a high dose. Tends to be many times higher than treatment dose fir obvious reasons.

Normally established at end of preclinical prior to administration in humans.

DLT on the other hand is dose limiting toxicity an amount of dosing threshold that when exceeded gives rise to or to be more precise risk of unacceptable adverse events.

These can be short term and is dependant on what type if indication we are treating and importantly is it better than the current standard of treatment.

Notice our competitor Breprocitinib that is pit in a treatment range dose of 30 to 45 mg QD.

Also of importance is the half life around 7 hours.

Co.pare that to 1801 which has a half life of 20 hours.

This can be interpreted that Brepocitinib working for 7 hours a day and 1801 working for 20 hours a day.

At the same time we have a far superior safety profile on a higher ie 300mg per day as per MAD cohort study.

Looking at it from this point of view l would say we have something very special.

I don't think it will be that long before a pharma snaps it up.

With regards to efficacy this should pose no problems as target Indications with TYK2 Jak1 biomarker results confirmed.

No complications with the signal transducer activation transcriptions ( STAT) pathways with downstream signalling either.

All looking very rose so as to speak.

We should prove better than Deucravacitinib in Psoriasis as we are dual inhibition albeit small amount of Jak1 which TM deemed what they believe the optimum amount.

Credit where credit is due it has proved first class so far.

Cash runway is fine at the moment. But they must not spends pounds to save pennies and this comes on the form of delays.

I think they lack expertise in project management. The critical path is the 16 week trial time. It should not l believe take circa at least 20 weeks to set up.

Regards

One good thing was relating to commencement of toxicology test.

Scheduled for May.

SP should climb gradually from here on as no predictable reason for a fall.

Data results for 1801 spot on.

Cash flow good for at least next 12 months in my opinion.

737 may well bring in an upfront payment with on licence but would not expect a huge sum.

IND approval is good news but no details of course as to which combo therapy or indication.

Whilst peer reviews ar ok they do get polished up. A positive slant so as to speak.

Results given by JR narrative with 1801 first class.

we should in effect receive notification that toxicology studies have commencedof by early June.

For the numbskull over on the other side, perhaps he could explain the relevance of MTD in light of phase 1a clinical trial completed and the undertaking of long term toxicology studies.

Clearly it and its mong mate cannot fathom that one out.

Get rid of those shorts lads or you will burn what little of your disabilty payment savings you have left.

Regards to all

Interesting kaken deal Num4

Immune-mediated disease specialist Alumis is currently in the process of buying Acelyrin. Alumis’ pipeline is headed up by ESK-001, with the company sharing phase 2 data a year ago that showed the drug met its primary endpoint of the proportion of patients achieving a 75% improvement in the psoriasis area and severity score at Week 12 compared to placebo.'

Notice the spin here and why peer reviews are not good.

75% of Poriasis patients acheved a Psoriasis area severity index of 75%.

Sounds good as met its end point target. How many were in the target of course is not mentioned.

Tyk2 Jak1 has higher efficacy and is now proven to be so in psoriasis.

There is supporting evidence shown on investor meet.

In addition they are looking at once a day dosing instead of the current twice a day.

This indicates a short biological half life.

Not idea how they will overcome this.

A deuterium atom is attached to part of the molecule that supposedly allows for better binding.

Not sure as to why as the valency of the H2 atom is the same as H1.

I do not see how they can turn a twice a day dosing into once a day.

Maybe slow release formulea that they had in flu treatments years ago! The point is it does not stay long enough in the blood.

LADMET!

It may be worth putting this poser to the two interlectual giants of the 21st century over on the ADVFN bb.

I am certain they can fathom out between them

i take it you are enoying reading this mong and its mate.

regards to all the rest

You are welcome DP64.

It is indeed a concern when the SP sinks.

Many here will look at tge end game.

On licence at least or a goid chance of takeover.

737 may play a part.

Regarding the mice whilst news to some that information is derived from work carried out by 2019.

The micro environment surrounding cancer cells.

737 LDG and a PD-1 inhibitor.

Much of this carried out of ourselves by SO so nothing new here.

It was removed from the SO pipeline website on early 2020. 737 that is despite having an extension of a year from the CPF after period of non development.

In addition Michelle Garrett had carried out much research work in in combo therapy with 737. Around early 2020 it became difficult obtaining Co.pound from SO.

It was tgen that Michelle Garrett focused on the Prexasertib CHK1 inhibitor I itially withdrawn due to MACE.

Interestingly Prexasertib is now fast tracked into endometrial cancer which is licenced to Acrivon.

My opinion is that gSK did not want as did not work, but GSK had obtained the Tesaro pipeline for 5.1 billion dollars.

Why on earth would they want another compound thst competes with one they already have.

GSK did not want l believe they did not want anyone else to have either.

All about stalling to enable you to det your foot I the door first.

Underhanded and illegal practices which GSK have a proven history of.

It has cost them several billions in out of court settlements of course.

It is bot a case of 737 does not work.

If you look at the way in which a chk1 inhibitor works it will never work satisfactorily as a mono therapy.

In combo is required

Attack the cell from the outside ie Pd-1 ìnhibitor use Gemcitabine to kill and cause DNSdamage to cancerous cell and use the Chk1 which signals cell death due ti the damaged DNA

Of course this looks at th P53 checkpoint and unfortunately cancers look to find by evolution an alternative pathway.

Plenty if potential and will work on some cancers far better than others.

The biggest downside is cancers developing resistance to treatments.i

Chk1 inhibition is not without it faults but needs careful selection as to what it is used in vonjunction with.

More versatile than Prexasertib in compatible incombo partners with less toxicity.

I doubt a deal going to be done overnight,,

Give Sp a chance to work on it.

Certai ly there is no need to raise funds in the immediate future, on a care ful run in my estimation they have enough funding to at least mid 2026.

Regards

DP you could take oast performance of tge excellent phase 1a results which prove tge benefits of attention to detail in formulating a compound that is to tge benefit to a patient with goid efficacy and more than satisfactory safety profile.

How many bios have achieved that?

9 out of 10 have not!

Just look at the amount of boxed restrictions placed on other Jaki inhibitors.

Give me one that is not restricted and why this is the case.

Risk now is phenomenally reduced.

If you do not agree then please be so kind as to indicate why.

Regards and have a super day.

SCLC is known for its rapid growth and tendency to spread, making it difficult to treat.

Survival Rates:

The 5-year relative survival rate for all stages of SCLC is around 7%. For limited stage SCLC, the 5-year survival rate is about 27%, while for extensive stage SCLC, it's around 3%.

Remission and Cure:

While a complete cure is not guaranteed for all SCLC patients, some individuals can achieve long-term remission or even a cure, especially with early detection and aggressive treatment.

It is not new.

Originally from 2019.

Triparna Sen.

'Conclusions: Given that anti-PD-L1/anti-PD-1 drugs have recently been approved as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of SCLC, and that the SRA737 + low dose gemcitabine regimen is currently in clinical trials for SCLC and other malignancies, our preclinical data provide a strong rational for combining this regimen with inhibitors of the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway.'

Of course on top of this we have Parpi resistance leading to an area of unmet need.

I have posted numerous links and excerpts on this.

If people can't be bothered to read or chose to mock that is no problem to me.

It boils down to what our compounds can do with regards to safety and efficacy.

There are those that would like to see our compounds succeed and others that would like to see it fail. That goes for pharmas and some of thise that post on various chat boards.

Myself l am happy.

Regards

Good morning PC1954.

Excellent trial results on SAD and MAD cohorts.

Most advanced competitor Tyk 2 Jak1 1 limited to 30 to 45 my QD.

Exceeding 30 mg results in alteration of white and red blood cells which is indicative or Jak2 activity.

Higher dosing in toxicology studies.

I for one will look forward to these increases in dosing.

Originally a max therapeutic dose at 12.5 mg per kilo of body weight up to 1000 mg per day per patient.

Sareum had gone to 30x therapeutic dose with no observed adverse effects.

All about the balance of the Jaks.

Will be interesting to see how higher dosing level can be increased when adverse effects begin to appear.

Clearly no problems at lower therapeutic levels.

Interesting also when the peer review comes out.

I am still of the firm belief that we will be bought out.

No mention of course about this in the meeting but that is understandable as to why.

Regards

FG

I have not spun it at all.

What points did you focus on in the investor meet?

Trial results are impressive.

A delay of a few months due to formulation of new compound with adjustments to enhance uptake.

What did you take from the narrative about the reasonings for manufacturing more compound?

I take it you also knew about the IND approval for 737 too?

I am not spinning it all sonny.

As I have stated it is just a case of a delay and what we have with a low share price.

As l have said before it is not just Sareum that are suffering, it is across all small biopharma sector especially AIM.

You have the typical traits of a shorter.

Bak home from work and now looked through the presentation several times.

The only real damage is the delay on trials start by around 4 months at most.

Sareum had decided to manufacturing more compound and whilst it was not deided at the meeting in Dec to formulate more compound they have now chosen this route.

Listening to JR and it makes sense and of extreme relevance is increase of the dose.

All in all the SAD and MAD trial results are top notch. The results exceeded Sareums expectations. The Jak ratio all important as indicated by the peer review and what data has been submitted and sufficient Patent protection in place.

1802 progresses in translational studies.

737 whilst now in the hands of Sareum progress is being sought with regards to development of.

Sareum as well as our selves are aware of the low SP price and hence have concerns from all involved.

With the exception of a few months delay and a low SP at the moment, the presentation gives an indication as to a very valuable marketable pipeline of compounds.

4 plus million in the coffers should see us through the current planned development of SDC1801 in toxicology studies, continued development of 1802 with now an added bonus of probable on licence of 737 within next 6 months or less.

Just a tad annoyed first thing as no progress of toxicology studies with 1801.

Now having listened to the presentation and gleaned the important info am far more settled.

Yes the presentation was required.

Regards

Good morning PC1954. No sir would never ever call you that.

From the info released in the RNS it now does not surprise as to why the investor meet.

May well be a lot going on in the background.

Are we looking at someone taking us out lock stock and barrel?

To me, and it may be to me only, that toxicology studies completion of 1802 preclinical and new we have 737 that given development timescales of around 6 months each, they will come together around the same time.

What it does do now increase the amount of options we have.

3 products that are eligible for on licence.

These do not have to be kept by a purchasing takeover pharma.

No news as to what indication 1892 is likely to be put into apart from T ALL cancer. To confuse things further it now has patent protection for use in immunotherapy therapy.

What exactly are Sareums intentions here. What is their direction?

Sareum puts out info but not enough to glean what their objectives are.

We are looking to licence at late preclinical or early clinical just does not give any sense of achievement.

I know small pharma been hammered.

As a poster mentioned with the comment alluding to deliberately stalling.

Certainly in a sense adds up to a buyout.

But a pharma that buys out will need to know exactly how far the pipeline has progressed and results from data to confirm at least possible Indications that each compound may prove satisfactory for approval into the clinic.

Too many loose ends at the moment.

Regards

Wes

I don't believe this IND approval would warrant an RNS. We were a minority in that we had a 27.5% financial interest. It was not our product.

We now have the licence for.

Let's see what Parker has up his sleeve with regards to 737 as that looks to be the focus at the moment.

We don't need an orderly queue forming.

What interest has been expressed?

I would guess that you are looking at 3 months to progress to a possible positive result on this.

It may have been negotiated in advance prior to obtaining the licence.

I don't see a massive upfront payment, Smallish upfront payment with milestones would give the SP what it needs a good kick from behind to lift it up.

Acrivon has fast track approval in endometrial and l don't see any reason why 737 cannot at least manage the same.

Some cancers difficult to treat, very difficult hence why fast tracking into lesser prevalence cancers which indeed lack effective treatment.

Regards

Similar boat to you Bailiff have just shy of 200k shares for ISA in my main share account

Question here is just exactly what is the objective of this IND granted application with regards to 737 development?

Are Sareum looking to on licence within next 3 months?

No mention before about the IND approval,

Indicative of the US pharma having achieved something!