>> are far more powerful <<
That's irritating as hell coming from an IMGN supporter, as -- in the old days of IMGN -- a single ricin A molecule kills.
I share your optimism............ I'm a big believer in the advances that have been made, particularly on the targeting end. Your statement was flat out wrong, however, and I merely pointed to such. In spirit, I don't disagree with you.
In ten years, your vision made be reflected in the markets. I tend to believe that we'll have (1) experience with immunogenicity using the new generation of immunotoxins, and (2) small molecule solutions that obviate the need for targeted toxins.
>> Ricin was large celled which evoked an immune response. <<
What you say is, of course, true. Ricin elicited a potent immune response. But, (1) small chemicals can also elicit a strong immune response when attached to a protein, and (2) it was IMGN themselves that touted the reduced immunogenicity of "blocked" ricin.
Thus far, from IMGN's data, it appears that DM1 conjugates may not elicit a strong immune response. This is a very good thing.
All of the old crap that they denied is being recycled as their reason to exist. Ticks me off.
We are both impressed with advances at IMGN. I consider them to be incremental apart from the targeting elements, while you seem to assign "miracle" status. We are both pulling for the company, wishing them success.
Good luck!
Rick |
