information on in-vivo tests we know about?, page-5

Hello 1S1,
I believe that your post is pointing into the right direction.
We should ask ourselves how long the basic elements of the technology OBJ is offering are around and how much testing on both methods which are combined in it's technology are already researched.



Research to open the barrier property of the stratum corneum in the US using electorporation pulses (in the case study of cyclosporin-A) and the effectiveness of iontophoresis ( in the case study of delivery of growth hormone releasing factor (GRF 144))in delivery show how far research of both methods is going back.
First case study about electorporation is from 1997, the second study about iontophoresis study were is from 1991.

Most interesting is the fact that the case study in 1991 for iontophoresis was already in vivo and the conditions were selceted based on previously performed in vitro experiments.
This might answer some questions wether in vitro or in vivo is in fact a necessarily debatable item for the testing 3M is conducting. 3M has vast testing results using either method out of 2 decades ongoing, all they need to figure out wether OBJ's particular mix of both is indeed as ingenius as OBJ is claiming ( to me this is highly likely and exlains the assembly of 3 international companies simultaneously checking this out)


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T3D-3RSNBM8-7&_user=10&_coverDate=01%2F02%2F1998&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1280352899&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=0a3b720a303a4eff5bf182a11a7ada6f

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T3D-4777M9T-12&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1992&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1280354798&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ddb0d5b4b9581ee949cd77404ea879eb


Both methods of OBJ's technolgy get a special mention in this paper in the US from 2006 as very promising for the future:

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/adis/add/2006/00000004/00000004/art00005


I therefore doubt that we see an extension for further testing as testing using both methods in the US are ongoing since almost 20 years already.
My other doubt regarding an extension derives from the fact that 3M would have most likely informed us on this before expiry of their MTA extension.

3M had 5 months time to determine wether the combined technology OBJ is offering is applicable to their pipelines, they dont need to test wether the building blocks of OBJ's technology are working, electroporation
and iontophoresis. This would definately reduce the testing periods as 3M does not have to deal with an entirely new technology, this is an applied technology.

In my opinion, 3M has spent the last 2 months to figure out the most suitable way forward to secure OBJ's technology and how to deal with competition.