Member Info for WeTookPelham

Odd IMO* typo.

@crustypete - you say you bought in yesterday despite your misgivings at the time and increasingly so now? Quite ood IMO. Sounds like you should have sold instead of bought, IMO.

"Alexandria, Sept. 2 -- Scancell Ltd has submitted a patent application for Anti-tumour Responses to Cytokeratins. This invention was developed by Durrant Linda Gillian, Brentville Victoria Anne, Cook Katherine and Symonds Peter. The patent application number is US202118253653 20211122. The patent publication number is US20252.."

https://www.globalipnews.com/?q=Scancell+

Can't work out if this is actually current/new?

Https://insights.citeline.com/pink-sheet/how-englands-cancer-vaccine-launch-pad-helped-scannell-speed-up-trial-patient-recruitment-X2PGNYAOSZG5JGPQ7VFICZCP3M/

Behind a paywall unfortunately.

Cheery as ever Ruck, never change.

RE conferences, personally now I would like conference attendance to mean coinciding announcing new significant data and/or deals/partnerships etc, I feel like the pharma's that needs to know about Scancell already know now IMO.

Although saying that conference attendance in general seems to quietened down whereas there was a period of them blitzing multiple conferences if I recall? Perhaps they have done what they need to do already?

Re Diggle...I've probably asked this not long ago so apologies, but do the same rules apply when it's the "closely associated with" insider?

Https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-025-06940-2

Published yesterday?

Good find as ever JB1.

https://www.fingerpaint.com/branding/

Scroll down this page, some very big pharma names on their books under "FINGERPAINT BRANDING SELECT PARTNERS". Actually that page is very interesting full stop, worth a read IMO.

How did Fingerpaint become aware of Scancell I wonder?

Edit - just to add to my post, to me it seems like they are shoring up the senior roles?

...Whist it's very quiet I wanted to mention something I mentioned before RE linkedIn.

It appears that fairly recently existing(?) senior personnel have been given promotions i.e.

- Nazim Uddin - "...starting a new position as Senior Development Scientist "

- Callum Scott - "...I’m honoured to share that I’ve been promoted to Senior Vice President, Development"

These to me sound like newly created roles as well as thank yous?

Also, a new(?) role I think recently filled:

- Shamim Kazmi-Stokes "Head of Programme Management"

Whereas, it appears 2 x feet on the ground type scientist have left(been released?) the company very close to each other, I won't mention the names here:

- A senior Peptide Scientist

- A formulation Development Manager / Programme Lead

Now obviously it could all be a weird coincidence, but we can assume there is lot going on behind the scenes, also a quick google/AI search implies this kind of activity means changes are afoot with the company.

Thoughts?

Getting rid of the day to day scientists implying duplication of roles incoming perhaps?

Fair point TF. I shall try and bite my tongue.

Looks like I'm living rent free in yet another posters head over there...I keep getting mentioned 🙂.

@MP - no point trying to argue with paid lackey's IMO.

#RentFree

Interesting. Are the timelines are a bit borderline? But who else could it possibly be?

"Scancell’s Post

View organization page for Scancell

Scancell

3,894 followers

3h

📈 The recent data from our SCOPE trial show the iSCIB1+ Immunobody® achieving a 69% overall response rate and 81% PFS at 11m in patients with target HLA types. That target population represents 80% of the population, and improvement in response is a significant step up from 48–50% with standard of care.

Why does this matter?

Some immunotherapies show efficacy only in narrow genetic subsets. iSCIB1+ has been designed to work in a set of HLA types and appears to elicit strong and durable T cell responses offering a more inclusive and potentially transformative approach for late-stage melanoma patients.

🎯 iSCIB1+ incorporates specific epitopes from the proteins gp100 and TRP-2 which play key roles in the production of melanin in the skin, and were identified from T cells of patients who achieved spontaneous recovery from melanoma skin cancers.

The SCOPE data showed all six epitopes in iSCIB1+ generated targeted T cell responses and CD8 T cell responses were associated with an improved clinical response rate of 83%. These T cells both kill tumor cells and induce memory T cells, resulting in a deep and prolonged response.

These results signal a potential new standard in melanoma treatment and a clear path to late-stage development, which we are accelerating planning for.

https://lnkd.in/e5EPy5Wg

#ImmunoBody #Melanoma #Cancer #MedicalInnovation #Biotech #Healthcare #Oncology #Science"

Worth finding the post also for the graphic/poster.

"....WTP - it's very sinister"

Yes, sinister is a good description IMO. We've had boiler room/paid derampers before (IMO) but this is very different this time.

Why would anyone take the time out to post all day to criticise a company/stock where they have no skin in the game. It's not normal behaviour IMO. I hope no one is falling for it.

Hence why I believe motives for posting can and should be questioned.

But yes, as you say also very reassuring that they feel the need to attack Scancell, why are they so worried is the intriguing question. Personally I don't think it's share price related i.e. shorting. But just my speculation.

"IO Bio plans cancer vaccine filing despite trial miss"

https://pharmaphorum.com/news/io-bio-plans-cancer-vaccine-filing-despite-trial-miss

"IO Biotech's cancer vaccine Cylembio failed to hit the mark in a phase 3 melanoma trial – but the company hopes to file for approval regardless."

"There are a lot of personalised cancer vaccines coming through the industry pipeline for melanoma, including mRNA-based candidates from Moderna (mRNA-4157/V940), BioNTech (BNT111), and Strand Therapeutics (STX-001), but IO's candidate has the advantage of being usable by all patients without the need for it to be customised to each patient. Another potential all-comer candidate is Scancell's SCIB1/SCIB1+, which recently performed well in a phase 2 trial."

RW - for the organised de-rampers it's clear they will say absolutely anything Scancell do (e.g. large director buys) is somehow wrong and bad, but anything potential competitors do is correct and amazing. Funny that.

There is something very unusual about this kind of deramping IMO, and not just the volume and velocity.

Your posts are very subtle and clever Dracula1, IMO.

May I ask though, is it true you were ramping VAL whilst slating SCLP? And now you're investor in SCLP?

CW - see my earlier post.

I know not everyone is interested in AI but this is very good summary (IMO) of the CVLP project:

https://vpod.ai/news/revolutionary-melanoma-vaccine-nhs-game-changer-in-cancer-treatment/