Member Info for sadoldgit

Good post Mayhem, my sentiments entirely.

New investment has come aboard.

Now these investors surely have Indications via discussions with Sareum approx how long these studies are expected to take and what can be achieved on favourable results.

There is an annual AGM. What is discussed at this AGM whilst speculative is not released as an RNS.

High net worth individuals or institutions will therefore be more privy to information which is not price sensitive and cannot be released in an RNS.

We now have funding to progress both compounds.

It will take time, we don't know for sure how long it will take and at the moment the BoD will not know for sure.

The purpose of this additional work is to gain safety data to give both compounds a significant increase in value.

Psoriasis is one indication with a global market capacity of 30 billion dollars.

Regards

FTC.

Good morning.

There is a difference here in that Sareum are accelerating the studies on 1802 which requires considerable funding.

But yes this latest fund raise can appear to be non positive and depends on how we interpret it.

The reason behind this acceleration is not known.

Sareum have the habit of giving us as least information as they deem fit.

The further the products are developed so also their value increases with respect to both on licence or takeover.

Setting up 1801 for entry to phase 2 and completing preclinical studies indicates to me that a company is interested in both compounds and in this instance would not rule out a takeover.

Regards

Bobbler, l were thinking the same when l saw it.

As the price of 22.5p per share l would say it was approached by the investor.

Plus of course they have the benefit of options.

We have raised more money than with Riverfort with less dilution and no 75% plus drop in the SP.

Would still like to hear of update on commencement of further toxicity studies.

May get update soon.

Regards

Potnak.

Not a case of sareum not thinking they will not get any money soon. They may or they may not.

They may well be expecting money from 737 but it is not a certainty.

By raising a further million to forward SDC1801 and SDC1802 it now does not matter a f..k.

If there exists any doubt then plan that into the equation.

Clearly there is interest and any dilution that has been made will be more than adequately recovered by the increase in value of our compounds by the studies to be carried out.

There is growing interest in Chk1 inhibitors to be used in combo therapy. That us seen by many as a way forward.

It is not effective at reducing cancer as it only prevents the formation of new cells by imposing adoptosis on DNA damaged cells.

Hence needs work in conjuction with Chemotherapy radiotherapy and any cancer damaging or destroying agents.

I will add there are no CHK1 inhibitors approved for clinical use. However, they do possess a very important role in DDR.

Prexasertib once discontinued is now being fast tracked into areas of urgent areas of unmet medical need by Acrivon.

The raise is goid news for Sareum and shows a heightened degree of confidence by the recent investors/ institutions recently taken on board.

Regards

Badsterman, good morning.

It may well be they can run toxicity investigations simultaneously on both compounds.

I would hazard a guess someone after both compounds.

Understandable why Tim put into COO position in July.

I don't think we will be putting SDC1801 into phase 2 clinical trial it will go to external pharma.

Discussions albeit informal, have taken place to lead to these developments.

Clearly some know a tad more than we do on here.

Regards

I am not condemning Tyk2 only putting forward that an increase in efficacy can be achieved with a optimum amount ie selectivity over another Jak hence dual optimisation.

Regards

At end of phase 2 data was bought for 4 billion.

It has been given a good safety profile as not Selective against Jak1 2 and 3.

If you have an inhibitor containing Jak1 2 or 3 you will have to provide data to indicate safety profile.

Deucravacitinb has already been bettered by other inhibitors of which 1 is an allosteric Tyk2.

Early claims yes.

Tyk2 Jak1 is dual inhibition subject to satisfactory safety profile should in most cases out perform Deucravacitinib.

As Tim stated many moons ago.

We think our molecule will give better efficacy.

There are other companies out there that are developing Inhibitors that they believe can give greater efficacy.

Tim.was right!

As we seem so reliant on this safety data.

In addition should have superiority over Deucravacitinib with regards to efficacy in some Indications.

Then what value can be placed on our SDC1801 should we achieve satisfactory safety data equalling that of Deucravacitinib.

As many would like our compound to succeed there are those that would like to see it tarnished/delayed from a commercialisation point of view.

Pharmaceuticals are no less corrupt than any other money making business.

At end of phase 2 on receipt of data Deucra sold for 4 billion plus a further 2 billion in commercial milestones being reached.

Now tell me. Was Deucravacitinib over priced?

It failed UC dismally. The bloody placebo performed better.

BMS putting a slant on the description that Deucavacitib regulates the active site.

Now this implies control over and ensuring healthy cell performance. If this were the case why the failure?

Question remains as to what is the value to be placed upon 1801 at the end of further safety data investigations with corresponding conclusions.

Value at phase 2 trial application approval and at end of phase 2 clinical trial results?

In most cases a compound is put into commercialisation before any additional Indications are entered into clinical trial.

Not always the case but in the majority.

To succeed we need to partner in some form or other, a large pharma that has a tad more clout and expertise outside areas than we have.

As far as l can see there are no Tyk2 Jak1 inhibitors approved for use at the current time.

A list below in the link of currently approved inhibitors.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9146299/

I would suggest that Sareum do know who the pharma is and also kept informed of developments.

The private oharma choosing to maintain anonymity.

However, once in payment is made or shares issued then surely the identity would have to be disclosed.

It would appear l believe on accountancy books as an asset with a value.

There are an awful.lot of Chinese clinical trial companies registered on the US

However, much work is carried out in China.

Any clinical trials in China likely to be under the Radar. As now onlicenced to a private pharma registered in the US it is very highly unlikely that the compound number will bare any resemblance to the original 245737 or SAR737.

Just my thoughts on this.

Regards

The long-term safety of botanical drugs, also known as herbal medicines, is difficult to evaluate because of the potential for adverse effects that are hard to detect. Here are some things to consider when evaluating the safety of botanical drugs:

Short-term effects

Herbal medicines are more likely to be associated with short-term effects, such as gastrointestinal issues or skin reactions. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that they are safe for long-term use.

Quality control

Poor quality control can lead to adverse reactions, toxicity, and other health issues. This can be caused by contaminants, adulterants, or incorrect formulations.

Clinical trials

The type of disease being treated determines the type of clinical trial that is needed. However, many botanical products have already been used in humans, so phase I studies may not be necessary.

Lack of monitoring

Many herbal products are poorly monitored or not monitored at all. This makes it difficult to know about their potential adverse reactions, interactions with other drugs, and how they work.

Limited clinical research

Most herbal medicines have only been studied in limited clinical research.

To ensure the safety of botanical drugs, regulatory authorities should put in place measures to ensure that they are safe and of suitable quality.

Good morning PC1954.

These long term safety studies that we will be undertaking, just how much of a knock on effect does it have on 1802?

Since they are similar compounds albeit not exactly the same, if you were were a pharma would you have an interest in 1801 or more of an interest in 1802 as it is now being heavily patented in immunotherapy?

Surely the long term safety data will be applicable to both.

No mention of 1802 developments so it does look as if we have no final candidate selection.

Regards

Ask of 1 x10000

Then up to 33 to buy

So we can safely say we are being low balled.

Sareum have now undertaken the implementation of further testing.

If ok Sareum played an ace card. Of course with additional positive safety data the stakes are bigger. If they do not want to up then bigger them as now we have taken on institutional investors which could fund a phase 2a trial. A further ace they could lay.

Apart from that love to meet up one day soon PC1954.

Regards

PC1954, goid morning to you sir,

I am in Suffolk until January. Work hours for me horrendous at the moment and will be up until end of November.

Still.not fully understand the reasonings for additional long term toxicity studies.

There was very little weight loss in animals used in preclinical.

Indicative of this is damage to kidneys which is not uncommon in the pharmaceutical world.

The maximum dose for paracetamol is 2g per day,

Over dose will lead to kidney failure albeit at much higher levels. Creatinine is released when muscle is lost.

Now according Tim there were no serious adverse events observed in the mice at 30 times therapeutic dose.

However dose per body weight is many times higher than will be in humans, but mice have faster metabolism.

Rabbits have been used and as far as l know results basically the same as for mice.

Long term toxicity is a risk with lst generation inhibitors caused by lack of selectivity.

Unfortunately as containing Jak1 we are associated in this risk group associated with boxed warnings.

All pharmas now if they contain either Jak1 2 or 3 are in the same boat.

Furthermore animal testing and even testing in humans is no guarantee that a drug is safe long term in humans.

However there are other means which us human modelling and the use of computational science in addition to computational chemistr( used in the early preclinical stage at molecule formulation)

These are new approaches and have been around for several years now and is increasingly being used in long term safety assessment albeit in a supportive role.

Is this what Tim has been set aside to do.

It is no mean feat if a task but he holds a PhD l believe in computational chemistry.

Not involvement of the use of live animals as such but cultures made of organs that closely represent the organs in the body.

Needs a lot more looking into the investigative technique of this further.

No idea as to timescales given to achieve this.

Phase 1a allows us to go onto phase1b.

Phase1b small trial and in this case if only run for a few weeks in Psoriasis will not give any indication of Psoriasis area severity index with endpoints looking at 75% reduction in 12 weeks.

Phase 2a could run longer albeit a smallish group of 25 or so patients.

At this point if run over a 12 week period would give indication of PASI score and indeed prove proof of concept.

We could probably fund thus ourselves especially now institutional investors coming aboard.

The main difference here is that the 1801 would be a phase 2 clinical trial as opposed to phase1.

Far more attractive with associated substantial increase in value approx 4 fold over phase1.

In addition with additional toxicity data gained from the phase 2a it would further support longer term toxicity assessment.

The compound then could also progress into further Indications most likely RA or SLE of which both areas suffer serious unmet need.

So we c

I would hazard a guess that these long term toxicity and safety tests will involve the effects of creatinine elevation levels with subsequent effects on the kidneys for a start.

Don't envisage any problems in this area with 1801.

+5

Creatine is a chemical that the body uses to supply energy to muscles, while creatinine is a waste product of creatine that is released into the bloodstream when muscles break down:

Creatine

A chemical made from the amino acids L-arginine, glycine, and L-methionine. About 95% of creatine in the body is stored in skeletal muscle, and 5% is in the brain. Creatine can help improve athletic performance, muscle mass, and recovery. Side effects may include dehydration, upset stomach, and muscle cramps.

Creatinine

A chemical waste product of creatine that is formed when muscles break down and release creatinine into the bloodstream. Creatinine is removed from the body by the kidneys. The level of creatinine in the serum reflects the total amount of creatine in the body and correlates with muscle mass. A blood test that measures creatinine levels can indicate how well the kidneys are working.

Creatinine is formed when creatine is spontaneously and irreversibly dehydrated, and when creatine phosphate is dephosphorylated

I pretty sure no mass selling of shares tommorrow.

The HNWI's bought them for longer term investment. This is not a RF catastrophe or the fund raise thst was done open to all current investors looking to make shirt term profit.

Not knocking the latter.

The funding was done to introduce price stability

And not allow slight slight gains in SP followed by very unwelcome drops.

We will see tommorow brings but 99% sure SP will rise a tad as we are still massively under valued for what we have.

I believe Potnak will be a tad disappointed on 16th in his belief that there will be a drop created by the admission of 12 million shares.

These are not for sale. They have already been bought.

Regards

Yes , thanks for the assistance there HbD

Indications mentioned

RA

SLE

Psoriasis

Also have data on similar compounds in IBD.

Regards.

Just quick calculation before the dreadful RF equity finance we stood at over a pound a share with approx 80% dilution we should be sitting in the 52 to 58p range even if we don't take onto account phase 1a clinical trial progress data results and the on licence of 737 to the unknown pharma.

We are now still very much undervalued !

Good to see a bit of stability returning to SP

Try sareum you tube proactive investor aug 2020