I do know there is some patent rejection controversy with COOL, but patents do get rejected quite freqently and need refiling for whatever reason. I hold a bunch of patents, fwiw, US and ex US. In my limited DD on COOL, I did read this patent.
freshpatents.com
Methods for development and use of minimally polarized function cell micro-aggregate units in tissue applications using lgr4, lgr5, and lgr6 expressing epithelial stem cells
Provided herein are constructs of micro-aggregate multicellular, minimally polarized grafts containing Leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein coupled Receptor (LGR) expressing cells for wound therapy applications, tissue engineering, cell therapy applications, regenerative medicine applications, medical/therapeutic applications, tissue healing applications, immune therapy applications, and tissue transplant therapy applications which preferably are associated with a delivery vector/substrate/support/scaffold for direct application.
There is a related publication in the peer reviewed literature on this topic as well.
These LGR receptors are interesting such proteins, in my view, and I am a (former) G-protein coupled receptor biogeek and have published on at least 8 GPCRs. I think there may be something key in this patent for the cellular workings of the skin cells and their development. But patents are limited in the information they give, and the levels of relevant products from the conditioned media. LGR GPCRs have cousins in the gonadotropin receptors and related cellular 'trophic' and 'tropic' such receptors. I can see, using my expertise, that there is some interesting stuff here. One key to me is how much such 'stuff' is patented, and how much is trade secret, and how much is hope? |
