Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : momo-T/FIF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (11638)	8/9/2018 3:30:05 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12215

Believe that patient was one of the 24 who did NOT show an antibody response, and that they were only singling that individual out for having been exposed repeatedly Indeed, the article I cited said: "PRS-050 appeared to lack immunogenicity, based on the absence of an anti-PRS-050 antibody response in 24 patients with postbaseline samples available. This included samples from six patients who received biweekly dosing. Notably, one patient was tested for ADA after having received 17 doses." But in a subsequent paper, Pieris employees say the following: "No signs of toxicity or immunogenicity were observed, based on the absence of anti-drug antibody (ADA) in 24 patients (except for one patient [ 31]), including samples from six patients who had received biweekly dosing." From Anticalin® Proteins as Therapeutic Agents in Human Diseases page 8. ref 31 is the article I cited. Note that 25 patients were evaluable. So . . . Cheers, Tuck