EP is a community where members connect through shared life experiences-- like MS--and so much more. You are not defined by any one thing, so be your true self and find others just like you at
Experience Project.
It sounds like they don't have the money to do a trial, but if they can find a pharma company partner, they could be ready to start human trials in a year.
Joined: Apr 09, 2005 Posts: 13 Location: Slovenia, Europe
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:26 am Post subject:
I have some questions about this movie, maybe worth of discussion:
Are all the cells that use the "red" potassium channel bad? It seemed to me that those are the cells that sustain our life-time immunity (some of them attacking our own body chronically)... Wouldn't blocking those cells (and leaving us with only those ad-hoc T-cells) make us vulnerable to other diseases? It was said that 95% of the cells in lesions are using this potassium channel, but once again - are those all of them? Why did the nature (evolution) "invent" the "red" potassium channel then? Any opinions?
Joined: Sep 11, 2007 Posts: 414 Location: southern California
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject:
Hi Damjan-
From what I understood, this is a very selective potassium channel blocker. Dr. Chandy was speaking in general terms so that we lay folk could grasp how the process works. Not all "red channels" will be affected. Just the "professional T cells."
Here are the specifics-
The structurally defined sea anemone peptide toxins ShK and BgK potently block the intermediate conductance, Ca2+-activated potassium channel IKCa1, a well recognized therapeutic target present in erythrocytes, human T-lymphocytes, and the colon. The well characterized voltage-gated Kv1.3 channel in human T-lymphocytes is also blocked by both peptides, although ShK has a ~1,000-fold greater affinity for Kv1.3 than IKCa1.
Much easier to understand Dr. Chandy's red and blue pictures
AC _________________ Husband diagnosed RRMS March 2007
20 lesions brain/spine
Copaxone, Swank, supplements, laughter
It seemed strange to me that Pfizer and AstraZeneca, who Dr. Chandry spent years with going over their compounds, did not step up to become his venture capital partners.
Is it possible that he and his colleagues don't want to turn the research over to a pharma company because they lose control of the project?
Beats me why he would have trouble getting money because this looks like it could be the real deal for curing autoimmune diseases.
GWA, I think your suggestion about control makes sense. I saw something on the Bionomics website (company coming out with their own kv1.3 inhibitor, so take this with a grain or two of salt) that could possibly make some big pharma less interested:
ShK-L5 advantages: High Selectivity to KV1.3
ShK-L5 disadvantages: Polypeptide (Large Molecule), Not orally available, Expensive
Joined: Sep 11, 2007 Posts: 414 Location: southern California
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 11:17 pm Post subject:
Dr. Chandy has founded his own company- Airmid. He is founder, director, and on the "drug development committee." I'm sure there are control issues and proprietary ones, as well. My uncle was a developer for a large international chemical corporation, and had to sign over all of his research and patents to his company. He did not receive revenues or royalties on his inventions.
The site states that Airmid is" seeking a committed pharma partner for development of any or all of three autoimmune products:
ORAL OR TOPICAL PSORIASIS DRUG
ORAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS DRUG
INJECTABLE MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS DRUG"
I hope they can work out any issues, find a partner, and get going on trials. It would really be a huge loss to everyone if this drug was held up because of money issues.
sigh,
AC _________________ Husband diagnosed RRMS March 2007
20 lesions brain/spine
Copaxone, Swank, supplements, laughter
GWA, I think your suggestion about control makes sense. I saw something on the Bionomics website (company coming out with their own kv1.3 inhibitor, so take this with a grain or two of salt) that could possibly make some big pharma less interested:
ShK-L5 advantages: High Selectivity to KV1.3
ShK-L5 disadvantages: Polypeptide (Large Molecule), Not orally available, Expensive
I read the bionomics pages dealing with MS in particular and now need to go back and watch the video again to try and figure out if the two companies are working on the same approach or if Dr. Chandry's ideas are slightly different. I didn't see anything on the other website that told about improvement in any model, unlike Dr. Chandry's mouse presentation.
As far as expense of the drug, the tens of thousands of $$$ per person spent yearly to take meds that are barely 30% effective seems REALLY expensive to me.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
