Member Info for sadoldgit

Yes agree HbD

12 weeks or 16 weeks in a phase1b should be sufficient for longer term toxicology effects.

Plenty of data cab then be extracted.

Sareum have kown about thus for some time.

No mention of an intended raise or what we seek funding for.

Do we in effect have deal in place subject to long term satisfactory toxicology results?

Critical aspect is safety and we are not purely Tk2, but with Jak 1 inhibition.

It may well be also to prove that we do not have any of the severe side affects associated with early first generation inhibitors with black box warnings

We don't want that!

My understanding also is that preclinical testing requires animal studies in two different species eg murine and canine.

Rather confusing to say the least

Potnak you write you think something has been flagged up. Bad trial design?

You throw so much doom and gloom and then say it does not really matter.

When it suits you, you put multi billion pound valuations in.

All under the guise of looking at the pros and cons. No stability whatsoever, however you are very predictable.

It is what it is at the moment.

Phase 1b was originally planned.

No need for additional toxicology studies.

Maybe they were not aware.

You now have a situation that you have to complete studies in animals after being tested in humans for safety.

Good to have phase 2 candidate but progression through phase 1a would indeed give an idea of efficacy.

Regards

'Well for once people do seem to be looking beyond the 20p placing price, which is encouraging

Certainly no rush for the exits'

They are investors not share traders who will jump in and sell at a slight profit which keeps the SP down.

Surprised they got a fund raise which is of course beneficial.

No mention as to where they intend to run phase 2 clinical trial. Perhaps just an exercise to prepare 1801 for on licence as looking at toxicology studies longer term ie over longer time period.

Very encouraging to see that no difference in adverse events (mild to moderate) between 1801 and placebo.

Continue in Psoriasis which is good.

Competition is stiff in this area.

Regards

No efficacy in Ulcerative colitus by Deucravacitinib. The placebo performed better the Deucravacitinib.

Most likely will do better in SLE but then again lack Jak1 inhibition.

JAK 1 on its own give adverse side effects due to selectivity over Jak2 and 3

Jak 2 hom o dimerises.

This does not rule out Jak1 inhibition of course but requires optimisation of the selectivity over.

Ropsacitinib is Tyk2 Jak2 work that one out.

I see it as sareums biggest threat in efficacy over 1801 if the so called claims made are anything to go by ie ne serious adverse effects.

Regards

Clearly someone never looks at competitors compounds or bothers to do any research.

Someone here also dyslexic or perhaps they could point me into the direction of 1081/1082 trials release in an RNS.

Good to see ICP-488 met there targets in Psoriasis.

Exceeded Deucravacitinib.

Both allosteric

One works better than the other.

As has been said many times first in class is not always best in class.

We have two great compounds. There are those that doubt the ability of our compounds.

However much you look at it it comes down to the molecules created by scientific research.

The point l find of interest is what are the specific Indications or indeed indication that will be in Phase 2 trial.

No mention of this in any form whatsoever.

Negotiations most likely taking place.

It takes ages to sift through and interpret the data.

This data relevant to the buyer or however you wish to call it.

Psoriasis as TM stated is a very competitive area.

Stiff competition in a very competitive market.

Do we go phase 2 in Psoriasis or chose another indication?

If we do chose another indication, Sareum as well as the buyer will need to have high degree of ability to succeed in this area.

We are not pure Tyk 2

We,wil prove to have greater efficacy in certain areas than an allosteric TYK2.

Half the idiots that post on here implying they have little faith in the compounds or not being as good as we are expected to believe are ignorant. Nothing else.

I will open a question

Why does two identified similar inhibitors that either Tyk2 or Tyk 2 Jak one have significantly different efficacy?

We,can take cct245737.

It did what it said on the side of the tin si as to speak

It is not the compound that does not work

It is by the very design of a Chk1 inhibitor thst it is best suited to combination therapy.

Sareum have raised 1801 and 1802 themselves.

Many years of experience gained in this sector to contribute a compound that is of benefit to the patient.

Why has so much patented protection gone into protecting our compound enabling if successful a very long commercial life with no threat of generic reproduction getting close to 2 decades?

It is not a sell on eBay, negotiations take months and that is after companies have received sensitive data.

Yes Saruem have made a few business mistakes ut l would stake my life that that is not to the detriment of 1801 or 1802.

Who is interested in blind data?

Sareum and potential pharma or pharma s

Is it price sensitive ?

To release information to say all went well with final results achieves very little.

The question still remains how are fund raised.

So the predicament of further issue of shares or on licence/ partnership still remains.

Until price sensitive information is released that states the confirmed direction of Sareum with respect to the above there is no point in releasing an RNS.

I were told this by a very good lawyer many years ago.

Sareum already made a big mistake in 2012 expectation of transformational deal with respect to Aurora +FLT3.

It never materialised the sP went up in anticipation but subsequently fell heavily.

So Sareum cannot release information unless confirmed.

The current period of no news confirms nothing concrete in place.

I have ruled out fund raising via dilution.

Sareum could have raised 3 months back easily in the nigh 40p range.

That no longer the case.

Negotiations take time initially through informal comms.

Eventually a formal offer will be made if an interested party chooses to pursue.

Any formal offer that is made must be notified to share holders.

That is how l understand it.

Silence is deafening but can also turn out to be golden.

We have explored all perceivable outcomes.

How many here think share dilution is a likely outcome?

Regards and good post PC1954.

I agree The Oracle,

Data results will have been shared with interested party or parties.

If the safety is as good as we are expected to believe then news should be forthcoming.

It was Sareums original intention to complete phase 1b by end of year.

Tim is no longer the CEO so hence a different path looks to be in progress that is in effect non dilutive.

Deals are made over many months starting with informal discussions.

Regards

Also in bare in mind that there are early first generation kinase inhibitors such as Baricitinib being trialled in LSE.

No whilst they have proven some efficacy they still have the dreaded restrictive use restrictions due to known safety concerns with early stage Jakis.

We are later stage and at the very least will better compounds such as Tofacitinib and Baricitinib.

It is is a case of large pharma becoming desperate to maintain commercial income for these ageing pipeline compounds.

Sareum will have had pharmacodynamic data for some time. This data will show the effects of our SDC compound on the body.

Hence along with preclinical data very indicative of areas of most likely of success.

Regards

It would be a considerable achievent to obtain efficacy in Systemic Lupus Erythematosis.

Tyk2 has or is showing some progress but need to look at latest developments.

Allosteric TYk2 whilst having at the moment a superior safety profile, does indeed appear to be showing signs of lack of efficacy in certain Indications.

We have according to TM have compounds basically Tyk2 with what he termed as what they believe an optimum amount of Jak1 too.

1802 has been used in SLE investigations as we know.

It may very well be that SDC1801 will prove to have greater efficacy in Indications that so far the allosteric TYK2 inhibitors have failed to meet the desired endpoints.

These compounds cannot be changed.

Maybe the addition of in combo therapy with either 1801 or 1802 may give them the required endpoints they need.

Just taking the pee with that last paragraph!

We have good safety with therapeutic doses being received.

Bare in mind also that the original intended therapeutic dose maximum was,set at 1000mg per day. The same as 245737 which gave a good safety profile and in trials was satisfactory as a mono therapy up to 800mg per day.

In my own opinion here is that the 1801 will be on licenced and a company will be selected to carry out clinical trials in Indications proving to be of best commercial value.

Regards

VTX958

An allostric Tyk 2 inhibitor which will lack efficacy in Psoriasis due to lack of dual inhibition of Jak1.

Regards.

Very little point in putting out an RNS to say the data is good.

If the data is good which had already been indicated by the 'may be conferred better than any other Tyk2 Jak1 inhibitor'.

No need for us to know.

What we need to know is news of licence agreement or whatever.

What ever the data says it does not prevent progression into phase2!

Regards

Exactly my thoughts on the removal if deliberate.

Thanks Laz for this snippet.

Of course if deliberately removed then news clearly on the horizon.

Regards

'Just looked - definitely removed - all bets are off!

If they have been removed, the question has to be for what reason surely.

Regards

There is oddly enough a company called my tommorrows.com that look to put pre unapproved treatments to patients with certain ailments, head cancer is one of them.

Head quartered in Amsterdam with an office in the USA.

I don't think any relevance here with Tim and Co visit however.

Regards to all

Glioblastoma the most deadly form of fast growing brain cancer with expectancy of life at around 15 months.

A bit of research required on this.

New or modified treatments required in this area.

Link below indicating current treatments which are limited to basically chemo and radiotherapy.

https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/brain-tumours/types/glioblastoma

I know M Garrett carried out work with CCT244747 a few years back indicating favourable results with radiotherapy in head cancers.

Volt resources were 25% down today.

O.004 to o.003 but latest gives price of 0.35.

Volt an Australian company are mining for graphite in Ukraine. Just south of Kiev.

Fortune favours the brave they say.

Https://www.riverfort.com/post/volt-resources-1