>> be much more helpful if you could explain the difference between Antegren and MLN02 - which seem to employ very similar approaches - and tell us why you think the first one will "work" why the other evidently didn't. <<
Erik:
I was an Athena shareholder, and have followed antegren since it was conceived.
I supervised the integrin projects at a competitive biotech, and I'm an investor in Dr.Butcher's "subsequent to LeukoSite" endeavor. I was also V.P. R&D at a reagents company at a time where there was a big-time focus on integrins. We made significant and independent efforts to discriminate among their tissue distributions.
I was retained by an underwriter that participated in the IPO for LeukoSite, and I did formal dd on LDP-02.
Given this background, I am nonetheless only capable of expressing an enthusiastic "lean" toward antegren. As you know, trials with anti-selectin and anti-integrin agents have largely failed to date.
As I've expressed elsewhere at SI, I was also "leaning" positive for LDP-02 (MLN-02).
But!!!...... an anti-beta7 is, IMO, not as powerful for gut indications as an anti-alpha4. Anti-beta7 completely misses any blockade of VLA-4 (alpha4beta1) interaction with VCAM-1. Moreover, an anti-alpha4 hits alpha4beta7, as did LDP-02. My "gut lean" (vbg), therefore, has always been stronger for antegren than for LDP-02.
For demyelinating diseases? That doesn't address your question, but the literature is crammed with encouraging data from preclinical models.
Hope that helps.
Rick |
