Scancell Share Discussion Threads

[bermudashorts] 26/3/2024 09:39

Sci102

I'm sorry but MarkingTime is correct, Scancell is only obligated to disseminate information if it would likely have an impact on the Company's share price. The link you've posted confirms that! They don't have to publish every single poster, paper, research report, presentation etc. etc.

Having said that, I'm sure at some stage those posters will appear on their website but keeping their site updated has never been one of Scancell's strengths.

Your ban on MT is harsh - perhaps reconsider?

[markingtime] 26/3/2024 08:47

Nonsense.The lack of any release of info to the public is itself evidence that there was nothing new released at the conferences.You are making an overly-hopeful, evidence-free guess....but the only actual evidence is that nothing new was said.

[sci102] 26/3/2024 08:38

No. That concerns only what should be RNSed. That is info that is expected to affect the pps. Obviously, it is not the case with these posters. However, all new data is insider info until released, just not always necessary to release via RNS.

[markingtime] 26/3/2024 08:36

Factually incorrect.There is a test for materiality re any new information - this is monitored by the NOMAD.

[sci102] 26/3/2024 08:26

All information that is made public for the first time (including behind a paywall) is inside information according to FCA. In this case, inside information that is lawfully released at a relevant conference. It does not need to include groundbreaking or very significant results. Anything new released for the first time is inside info.

The only way it is not is if at those conferences there is not a single data point that has not been comunicated before. Of course I'm not saying that the FCA should (or would) take any action for a couple of posters. That's not the point. To me it is all about respecting your investors.

[markingtime] 26/3/2024 08:07

From their absence, therefore, one can conclude that there was no material new information!There is absolutely no obligation on any company to release all presentations.

[rogerbridge] 26/3/2024 08:04

Well said.

[sci102] 26/3/2024 07:07

Do investors have to remind the company to upload public presentations on their website every time?

March 7th, 12th and 13th missing, how long does it take to upload a pdf?

(They are public in the sense that since it is presented to the science community, it is not confidential information any longer)

[marcusl2] 22/3/2024 09:32

Modi-2 SNAPvax mediates strong immune responses and tumour therapy in mouse models.




SC 129 as a Car T (Genmab licensed the rest)

Here we have engineered third generation anti-sialyl-di-lewisa CAR T cells to target tumour cells.

Anti-sialyl-di-lewisa CAR T cells can induce a strong anti-tumour response

[markingtime] 19/3/2024 12:49

Neither can I, obviously. But I wouldn't want to stop them....

[ruckrover] 19/3/2024 09:05

I can't imagine there are too many people shorting Scancell since it would appear grossly under priced at the moment. Of course, news could be bad as well as good but you would need inside information if you wanted to short without a massive risk.

[rogerbridge] 19/3/2024 07:34

A complete response, the holy grail.

[markingtime] 19/3/2024 03:23

I agree. Short-sellers are one group of people who MUST buy the shares at some point in the future. And, if a bid or major deal arrives before they do.....? Well that's the risk they take...

[chilltime] 18/3/2024 13:28

Bermuda

The data we have is for 13 patients, 3 outstanding, 16 are in the first part.

All 16 are now past the 25 week point (3 scans), as of now.

Previous data on the 13 included some not yet at week 25.

The first 4 25 week scans saw shrinkage of -69% and better. Since then (Nov update) 1 complete response.

One with shrinking tumours was just below the partial response level. So it could be 12 out of 13 by now. If the 3 unreported have has partial responses, it could all equate to 15 from 16 93%.



We’ll see, if few ifs but the early data is very good.

Also a chance that others have had a complete response.

If there are 13-15 responses then the remaining 27 only need to see 12-14 responses, which is around 50% compared to 85% currently.

Scancell have the extra data now so if they are presenting it, it’s surely price sensitive and will require news prior.


Only 9 patients were past week 19 scans in the last update (Nov). 3 we have no data at all, all 16 are past week 25 scans.

[ruckrover] 18/3/2024 10:24

Not sure what the problem with short selling is. If a share is overvalued anything that results in a more realistic price benefits investors in the long term.

[nigelpm] 18/3/2024 08:03

lol - crazy petition and also fundamentally nonsense.

[talais] 18/3/2024 07:37

Please sign and share on all social media platforms https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/657294

[marcusl2] 17/3/2024 11:46

Avidimab explained well. It could improve and potentially extend patent life for big Pharma products. In 2022 Trinity thought Avidimab could have peak sales of £8.5 billion and a royalty for us of 8%.



The early Scib-1 results 2018

[marcusl2] 15/3/2024 22:41

I think companies have enough info on Avidimab to make a deal. Those early assessments maybe did not proceed as the deals were too small and unattractive.
E.G.



Seagen/Pfizer tested it.

SEA-CD40 (Seagen) is in Phase II trials for advanced solid tumours. AvidiMab was
used in the Fc region (Exhibit 5) in an IgG1 format, with key residues from murine
IgG3 transferred into the human SEA-CD40 IgG1 Fc region. The results for iSEACD40 showed higher Fc-Fc self-association, slower off-rate and improved binding
to CD40, and better functional affinity than original SEA-CD40. These findings of
better performance were also seen in other immune models that rely on clustering
and/or increased residence time for activity. Preclinical work continues to
highlight the versatility and broad applicability of the AvidiMab platform, with
sizable improvements seen across many applications.

AvidiMab is employed in the COVIDITY programme, where
recent results have validated AvidiMab as an immune response booster.

Avidimab enhanced Glycans

SC88 binds to unique glycan (Lewis a/c/x) on GP and GL

 h88 targets 100% of colorectal tumours on TMAs with restricted normal tissue distribution
 AvidiMab TM technology introduces intermolecular cooperativity => enhanced target avidity
 AvidiMab TM-engineered SC88, i88G1, exhibits inflammatory cell killing (ICD) through pore formation


SC27
AvidiMab TM engineered SC27, i27G1 exhibits improved functional affinity and direct cell killing


iSC2811
Ultraspecific SSEA4 mAb – lead AvidiMab® modified clinical candidate
iSC2811 enhances T cell engraftment and prevents exhaustion
Potential for improving CAR-T approaches

Scancell also demonstrated AvidiMab® modification of SC129 (Genmab)
reduces the off-rate


AvidiMab® – a proprietary platform for enhancing the avidity of
any antibody
► Enhances avidity by promoting Fc-Fc
interactions
► Reduces off-rate → increased affinity
► Increases direct cell-killing
► Potential to improve the therapeutic index of
any monoclonal antibody
► Patent protected

Could extend patent life.

[marcusl2] 15/3/2024 22:32

Burble

I was thinking today about Avidimab. So far, we have only really tested it in Covidity. Which whilst technically clinical, I wonder whether outsiders looking in haven't really given it much of a second thought. The fact it's deployed in iSCIB1+ I think could be the catalyst needed, it's being tested in an oncology setting which will peak interest.

From a scientific perspective, I wonder whether it may be overshadowed by the fact that SCIB1 and iSCIB1+ are not technically the same backbone with the addition of avidimab. But instead has more epitopes and avidimab too. So from a technical perspective will be difficult to say whether any improvement over the original SCIB1 construct, is due to the additional epitopes or whether it's due to the avidimab addition.

I'm curious what other people think. Do you think iSCIB1+ will be the catalyst needed for us to start doing some licensing deals on avidimab? or do you think one will be done before we get data on the new amended SCOPE trial?

[torquayfan] 15/3/2024 21:40

Marcus - yes $4.2 billion would do nicely thank you !

[marcusl2] 15/3/2024 08:06

Coming off arguably its strongest year ever and loaded with $4.2 billion in cash, Genmab is hunting for an acquisition.