Member Info for WeTookPelham

Good point RW and TF, despite the fact the JP Morgan conference appears to be be one the biggest and most prestigious events with no doubt a great opportunity to showcase the science, they feel they do not need to use it for a scientific platform. Very interesting IMO.

CW, good posts and well done for sticking your neck out RE JP Morgan attendance.

Https://www.jpmorgan.com/about-us/events-conferences/health-care-conference

"How do I register for the conference?

The J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference is for clients of the firm, by invitation only. Please reach out to your J.P. Morgan representative to inquire about an invitation."

Now THAT is interesting.

...wider than normal?

As per TF's comments:

"However, given that GenMab are a massive Company with effectively limitless resources, I find it hard to comprehend that it'll take them 5 years to move this science forward substantially"

This exactly. And why would Genmab want to wait that long anyway? They want to get the jump on their own competitors too don't they.

And who knows, perhaps Genmab are interested in Scancell from more than just the mabs side of things.

MarcusL2's summary sums it very well, for me at least, SCIB1 does seem to "blow those results out of the water":

"14/12/2023

13:47 marcusl2: Scib blows them out of the water

Moderna

87.30 +8.70 (+11.07%)

Pre-market: -

MKT cap $30 billion

Do the maths about how much Scancell is worth!"

"14/12/2023

13:36 marcusl2: Resected as a monotherapy (5yrs) 75% v Moderna Pfizer (with cpi) (3yrs) 49%

SCIB1 is the lead programme and has completed a dose-escalation Phase I/II monotherapy study in 35 patients with metastatic melanoma. Fifteen patients with tumours received SCIB1 doses of 0.4mg to 8.0mg, whilst 20 fully resected patients received doses of 2mg to 8mg. There was a dose dependent immune response in 88% of patients and an associated anti-tumour effect. Of the fifteen patients who had tumours present, two patients showed objective reductions in tumour burden and seven achieved stable disease. Of the 20 patients with fully resected disease, 15 were disease-free and were still alive five years post immunisation. The authors concluded that SCIB1 is well tolerated, stimulated potent T cell responses, and the results warranted further evaluation as a single agent adjuvant therapy or in combination with checkpoint inhibitors in advanced melanoma disease.[1]

Non-resected

Scib-1 plus CPI 85% orr.

Survival data should be better also"

My last comment was somewhat tongue in cheek, but it's an interesting tweet:

"Last week, the Scancell team held its Annual Away Day!

As we return, we carry with us a renewed energy & a shared commitment to generate truly novel medicines to treat significant unmet needs in #cancer & #infectiousdisease.

Thanks to our team for making this day a success."

Firstly it IMO sounds like a tweet a big company would make, more professional/corporate. And they would never have tweeted like that before IMO. Plus it does show just how many staff they have now.

Away day? That's what big companies do.

"

Trinity Delta view: Scancell’s successful upsized >£10m placing removes financial uncertainty and, assuming similar success in the Open Offer, means the cash runway now extends to late 2025. This covers the important clinical milestones for both SCIB1 and Modi-1 programmes and could be extended further through the partnering or out-licensing of selected programmes from the GlyMab and AvidiMab antibody platforms. As usual in such situations we suspend our valuation and forecasts, but for context our last published rNPV based valuation for Scancell was £300.1m, equivalent to 36.7p/share.

"

https://*********************/research/trinity-delta/trinity-delta-lighthouse-scancell/33_d4e23ca1-4322-4fb1-a879-9d8f32b4ab2e

Hi TF, fair enough. But douve87's post has somewhat triggered something for me. I fully agree with every single point he makes. I almost wish I could have written it in fact.

And it makes me realise the comments made by JCM at AGM about de-risking are somewhat disingenuous IMO. Big pharma clearly do NOT need completely derisked biotechs/products. So why are the adhering to this mantra?

And how much difference does the raise actually make, as douve87 says "£6m hardly puts us in a position of power it makes no difference other than diluting us LTHs"

But yes, a bit more patience needed...again! The keyword as ever. None of us are getting any younger though!

The should rename themselves to "patience pharma".

VERY well said douve87.

I agree it seems this BOD seems to lack the commercial nous/street smart to get things done in a common sense, proactive and logical way. It is hugely infuriating.

I especially agree with what you said here:

"Its very easy to say more data, more derisked and we will get a great deal but we keeping getting more data, better data and yet the share price goes down whilst other biotechs with less data or worse data get deals."

I've been implying this for a long time. I don't get it. Pre clinical deals happening elsewhere for billions. Yet Scancell seem to think they absolutely must get more an more data? Just sell up and get on with it I say, enough is enough.

How much do we think Scancell want for licencing/the whole thing? It must be a lot of there hasn't been an exploratory offer?

Yes, impressive publication to be mentioned in, arguably 'the' most well known publication for high net worth individual types?

I don't recall Scancell being mentioned in Forbes before?

Https://www.forbes.com/uk/advisor/investing/how-to-invest-in-healthcare/

"Calculus’ Liz Klein points to UK small-cap Scancell as an interesting option: “Scancell recently achieved a significant milestone by validating its cancer vaccine platforms.

“They are conducting a trial to assess the effectiveness of their ImmunoBody DNA cancer vaccine in combination with standard-of-care checkpoint inhibitors [a type of immunotherapy] in patients with advanced unresectable [non surgically-removable] melanoma. Recently the company delivered early but very encouraging data.”"

A very good point scousemark.

Anyone care to tweet reporters/influential science types and the like? Shame there is no official article to retweet. Although now I'm wondering if it was the same person here reported previously?:

https://www.clatterbridgecc.nhs.uk/news/calumsstory

Many thanks ciaskin.

I found this article which helps explain what they are:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4500705/#:~:text=At%20face%20value%2C%20a%20key,high%20esteem%20by%20their%20colleagues.

So I the AGM were they saying KOLs were in place as part of the trials?

Again, many thanks Botski for the recording.

Only had a quick scan through so I may be approximating here, but they/the trials are clearly being closing watched and/or particpated by KLO's? Knowledagable something? Can someone clarify please.

Scancell seem to be in the radar of big pharma, but, that same eternal question remains when will the pull the trigger?

I can only assume the AGM attendees who also post on here are too busy tucking into the supplied (celebratory) horderves, smoked salmon, caviar and champagne to post ATM.

You obviously need to ask with a subtle wink 😉