As far as PTX-200 being used as a cell therapy enhancement, I can see exactly why you have come to that conclusion. Upon googling checkpoint inhibitor adjuvant, this is what comes up:-
So, your investigative work into the information contained in the patent application on WIPO lead you to your early conclusion about the "A" in CellPryme-A well before it was even announced. Very good pick up, hottod . There I was careening off into the weird and wonderful world of manufacturing transduction and activation! LOL Nevermind, at least I gave it a crack and learnt some stuff along the way!
Now that I am finally on the same page... does the following statement from our website have anything to do with this or ia it something totally unrelated, do you think? Perhaps it relates in a general sense to our upcoming OmniCAR clinical trials in which we will be clearly combining our different proprietary technologies and applying different modalities to the individual CarT therapies heading into the clinic.
The only reason why I am not totally on board (albeit on the same page as to your rationale) with regards to the Universal Receptor Immunotherapy patent applicaton is the title. The title suggests it is T-cell and CAR (ie antigen) related. I have been known to go off on the wrong tangent, so feel welcome to ignore or oppose. But i'd be really interested in getting your opinion on the above statement from our website.
Also, are you of the belief that will be receiving news on the patent front and/or our AML study and/or further OmniCAR pre-clinical data or all of the above?
The only reason why I am not totally on board (albeit on the same page as to your rationale) with regards to the Universal Receptor Immunotherapy patent applicaton is the title. The title suggests it is T-cell and CAR (ie antigen) related. I have been known to go off on the wrong tangent, so feel welcome to ignore or oppose. But i'd be really interested in getting your opinion on the above statement from our website.
