Ann: Core patent granted in Australia , page-10

Genentech got acclaim because it was the first example of a bispecific antibody getting in. Phylogica's technology is not superseding anything, and to suggest so shows a lack of understanding in the field. The phylomer for Roche was to do the same thing that numerous companies have been working on for years, which is targeting TR or LRP receptor to transport cargos across BBB and deliver into brain. Every major pharma plus about 20 biotechs are working on this concept. The phylomer is not going to be used to take antibodies across the BBB. Why, costs...linking a peptide to a biologic antibody is extremely expensive and GMP requirements super tough. That is why Genentech got so much press for their work.

Another thing that I wanted to bring up, that many of you have maybe not thought about, but I have heard repeatedly in my circles is the issue of immunogenicity of phylomers. I mean they are taking large peptides 28-40mers, and those are their phylomers that they are identifying from these libraries. What do you think happens when you put that size peptide derived from bacteria or virus into humans???? Immune response. Even if they could lower the immunogenicity to 0.1% or lower, which I doubt, still means could never become drug. The protein therapeutics sold on todays market of that size are all virtually identical to human. I mean what was the Pfizer collaboration about, using the same library to get a vaccine, which means a peptide that induces an immune response. Basically peptides over 15-20mers in size have super increased risks of an immmune response in patients. That isn't my opinion, that is fact. And phylomers are derived from bacteria or virus which our immmune systems have spent generations evolving to defend against. I have heard alot that the phylomers could be could good tool compounds, (kind of like Adnectins from Adnexus, now BMS, and DARPins, now at MedImmune/AZ) but that is about it, but those companies did sell for good valuations, but at the time believed they could be drugs. IMO that is why no deals have come to pass for PYC, why would I want a 30-40mer peptide that gives me no benefits over other technology...peptides of smaller sizes,a number of them focused between 5-15mers that have shown just as good or better affinity, stability, and no immunogenicity for the most part, or even other polymers?. ((for those who don't know the peptide has to be above 10-12mers to be displayed on MHC receptors and get an immune response, although the efficiency of that process appears to go way up when you get above 20mers. That is just what I have been hearing in my circles.

Another patent never hurts. IMO they are so broad that they could never be defended in actuality, since they are saying any peptide from any bacteria or virus, and anyway to prepare the genomes, which they literally just cut them up, so anyone experienced in the field, that would be obvious. Its like some of the gene patents, that were granted, and now slowly being overturned. But again, right now it certainly isn't a bad thing for PYC, and maybe it will help them to M&A with someone...who knows...

Regardless of all that, the clock is ticking, as they are out of cash by June/July...so we will see...its getting nail biting (and to think I was actually considering buying shares when I first posted on this message board)