What is claimed is:
1. A method for obtaining a composition or an isolate ofexosomes or microvesicles comprising: providing a liquid thatincludes exosomes or microvesicles; providing a substrate having asurface, the surface having an array of exosome-binding ligands;wherein the array is formed from one or more polymers, wherein theone or more polymers include a monomer species, wherein all monomersof the one or more polymers have an exosome-binding ligand; whereineach ligand is in the form of an anionic group at pH4-8; wherein the array of exosome-binding ligands enablesexosomes or microvesicles to bind to the substrate; contacting theliquid with the substrate inconditions enabling the binding of exosomes or microvesiclesto the exosome-binding ligands; and separating the substrate from theliquid; thereby obtaining a composition or isolate of exosomes ormicrovesicles.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein eachligand of the array is spaced no more than 10angstrom apart from another ligand of the array.
3.The method of claim 1, wherein the ligands of the array are spacedapart by more than 2 angstroms.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein part of thesubstrate surface includes the array and part of the substratesurface does not include the array.
5. The method ofclaim 1, wherein the polymer is a polysaccharideor peptide.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein theone or more polymers are coupled to the substrate.
7. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the one or more polymers are soluble inthe liquid.
8. The method of claim 1, further including astep of eluting exosomes or microvesicles from the exosome-bindingligands to release the exosomes or microvesicles from the substrateafter the substrate is separated from the liquid.
9.The method of claim 8, further including astep of separating the released exosomes or microvesicles from thesubstrate.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein eachelectron rich group is in the form of an anionic group at pH5-8.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein eachelectron rich group is in the form of an anionic group at pH7.2-7.4.
-------
Apologies for posting this here - but I've been watching this stock trying to be a bit disciplined about understanding the patent position before buying. And I think the patent that has been granted actually looks pretty broad. And the other IP they have looks useful now. I'm not claiming to be an expert.
As I understand Ex1 now has, in the US, the rights to this method, substantially the method described in claim 1, with the other claims acting as sort of elaborations and footnotes to claim 1.
This means that to get around the method of claim 1 in the US competitors will need to avoid the precise wording of claim 1 applying to themselves.
The size range of exosomes 2 -10 and the pH ranges look specific. 10 angstroms is not large - I'm thinking diametre of hydrogen atom or about 10 angstroms to a nanometre from memory. But ligands are small. Are they all that small? I don't know. Polymers are made up of monomers so the language looks pretty general and apples to both polysaccharides and peptides which as a layman I translate to sugars and proteins.
In trying to find a reading to get around the patent (not because I want to but because I think that is the way to understand how good they may be - how expansive the scope of the monopoly) the best I've come up with (without trying hard is this) - re - "wherein all monomersof the one or more polymers have an exosome-binding ligand;" - all reads like every single monomer or 100% of the monomers in the one or more polymers have --- now depending on the method of manufacturing the polymer it might be difficult to get a 100% pure polymer such that every monomer is or has an exosome-binding ligand - perhaps the wording would have been better if "all" mean nearly all or most, as some imperfections in a manufacturing process (even a biomanufacturing process which might have some small level of contaminants) would then be read in favor rather than out of favor.
If company XYZ has a method that claims method 1 but instead says "wherein most or a high percentage (say 99.9% etc) of monomersof the one or more polymers have an exosome-binding ligand;" is that a different method? Even if they did in practice how would anyone tell - how would the difference be detected?
Overall, though, I reckon Ex1 has a good patent here. Broad and in a good jurisdiction. But I repeat I'm no expert.
I may regret not buying later - but I'm not ready personally to do so yet. I can see that Ex1 has another very good thing going for its deal making that it didn't have before but I can't determine how much of Ex1 price before and now is due to folks without understanding of the technology buying what they don't understand because they have the money to do so and want to believe in something. Balls, heart and faith (kyriaco mentions). But having money to spend helps too. And why balls, heart and faith go here an not elsewhere isn't clear from the commentary. But why here and now is a brains based decision would be interesting to read.
@A.I
Nice link to the Therapeutic reversal of Huntington's disease paper - when I thought you were comparing search engines to exosomes and frankly I didn't think you had a clue, (the early developers of internet enabling tech were on a land grab in my opinion - they wanted to capture future market share by offering something for nothing - Google, Facebook) maybe, you do though.
It takes most of a day to read and process a paper like that in my opinion. I note the authors are all chinese. How much of it translates directly to Ex1 I don't know.
What I do think though if there are more technical articles and discussion on Ex1 here then it will at least seem like folk understand what they have invested in and are discussing it where they can.
