To: Biomaven who wrote (261 ) 2/10/1999 12:14:00 PM From: John Bloxom Respond to of 804
Hi Peter: From David and others here, and my advisors in NY, I learned that the molecule is extremely difficult to produce recombinantly for, amongst other reasons, the fact that during process of refolding it into a three dimensional structure from the flat structure in which it is initially produced most of the molecules "break" and have to be discarded. Folkman's lab studies used a non-refolded suspension of angio and endo, and they worked. From what I understand, however, non-refolded suspensions are completely out of bounds in the clinic. A rough analogy would be that Folkman proved that crude oil burns while what we really need is a super-refined grade of Jet A that no-one seems to be able to make reliably at this point. What I hear is that molecular biologists are very bright people, and that they will eventually figure out how to make the stuff in commercial quantities (partucularly endo, which I understand is a simpler molecule). In my view, however, the real risk with ENMD is that somebody poring over the patent claim is going to locate that therapeutic portion of the molecule that binds to the surface of the endothelial cells lining the tumor neo-vascular system, lop it off, express it (and only it) recombinantly, get a composition of matter patent on it, and be in the clinic while ENMD is still trying to figure out how to make the much more complex parent molecule (in this connection, note that the BMY release refers to "small molecule" anti-angoigenic agents still being pursued). That's why I haven't owned the stock since May. All of this reminds me of a great saying I heard once: You can always tell the people who are the pioneers... . . . . . . They're the ones in the burning wagons. BTW, check out OXGN on the anti-angio front. Could be a sleeper. Regards, John