Athersys vs. Mesoblast

I have read quite a few posts about Mesoblasts' patents on MSCs and how they relate to Athersys. Some might even be wondering about how Athersys can go ahead using (MSCs) stem cell technology and not get into a patent lawsuit with Mesoblast. I want to point out a few things:

• Athersys uses MAPCs (Multipotent Adult Progenitor Cells), not MSCs. So the two cell technologies are different
• Athersys has exclusive intellectual property rights to the MAPC technology

As far as how MAPCs are different from MSCs, the following link lays out the differences in detail. It is a long read and quite scientific, so read it at your own peril :
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2019.01952/full

And this link compares the two:
https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/462886/fimmu-10-01952-HTML/image_m/fimmu-10-01952-t002.jpg

There are a few things I would like to point out:
1. Athersys is the only company in the world that uses MAPCs. What this means is that no other company has experimented clinically with MAPCs, so the clinical trial data is very thin.
Contrast that with MSCs: many companies have used MSCs (Mesoblast owns proprietary rights to mesenchymal lineage adult stem cells (MLCs), which are Mesoblasts patented MSCs). This means that there is a mountain of evidence suggesting the safety and efficacy of MSCs by third parties as well. Not so for Athersys' MAPCs
2. MSCs have proven anti-fibrotic effects, whereas MAPCs have very limited testing in this regard. What is fibrosis? Here is an excerpt from the above link I posted: "Fibrosis is associated with organ failure and high mortality. It is characterized by aberrant accumulation of myofibroblasts, which secrete extracellular matrix proteins like collgen and fibronectin. MSCs have been investigated for their role in reducing fibrosis in the kidney, lung, heart, skin, liver, and bone marrow".
That is a HUGE plus for MSCs over MAPCs

3. And here is the big difference ---- to date, MAPCs (Athersys) have NEVER had a Phase 3 clinical trial completed successfully. The most advancement MAPCs have had is a currently on-going Phase 3 trial in Ischemic Stroke.

4. Athersys has a history of failures with its MAPCs (some of the criticism by that hit piece on Seeking Alpha is justified, in my opinion). In Athersys' Phase 2 study for Ulcerative Colitis, the results did notprove efficacy. Here is a quote and the link from that 2014 study:
"In this chronic, advanced UC patient population, a single IV administration of MultiStem did not show a statistically significant improvement compared to placebo in the primary efficacy endpoints - change in endoscopic score from baseline as measured by modified Baron score at 8 weeks and change in Mayo rectal bleeding subscore from baseline at 4 and 8 weeks; and At 4 weeks, the proportion of responders on MultiStem was significantly greater than placebo but the benefit was offset by declines in a minority of MultiStem-treated patients such that overall benefit at all time points measured was not significant. Multiple additional secondary endpoints at week 4 and week 8 were also explored and there were no significant differences observed between the two groups including clinical remission and clinical response."

Athersys' CEO acknowledged only safety... "These results confirm the consistent safety profile Athersys has seen in previous clinical studies involving MultiStem...." No mention of EFFICACY.

So @benelong No need to worry about Mesoblast not being successful (with reference to your post about the SeekingAlpha article here) as Mesoblast does NOT use MAPCs

**** I mentioned how some doctors are using Azithromycin in the US to reduce inflammation during the COVID-19 attack. Since Mesoblast has proven many times over that its MSCs reduce inflammation, I am thinking that MSCs can be administered to COVID-19 patients to reduce inflammation EVEN BEFORE the corona virus starts attacking the lungs. If so, that would be a treatment for COVID-19, not just a treatment for COVID-19 induced ARDS. I am thinking SI is not disclosing much at this point and there is more to this than he is letting on!!
If MSCs can treat the flu, then they can treat COVID-19 as well (see my statement towards the end of this post about the flu) ****

Also, I go back to Mesoblast's PR from 03/10/2020 where they state:

Mesoblast’s intellectual property (IP) portfolio encompasses over 1,000 patents or patent applications in all major
markets and includes the use of MSCs obtained from any source for patients with acute respiratory distress
syndrome (ARDS), and for inflammatory lung disease due to coronavirus (COVID-19), influenza and other viruses.
Additionally, these patents cover Mesoblast’s manufacturing processes that yield industrial-scale cellular
medicines. This IP position is expected to provide Mesoblast with substantial commercial advantages as it develops
its product candidates for these conditions.

What's explicitly stated in the above statements are (and you have to wonder why they are explicitly stating them):
ARDS
Inflammatory Lung Disease due to COVID-19
Influenza and other viruses
Yield of industrial-scale cellular medicines
Those words are literally yelling out to the world that Mesoblast has a solution which can be dished out on an industrial scale to the world.
Pay special attention - it mentions the flu and other viruses on top of ARDS and the inflammatory lung disease due to COVID-19.
The Flu? Really the Flu? How big of an annual market is that?
Again, I go back to the anti-inflammation properties of Mesoblast's MSCs. Get rid of the inflammation so that the body can fight these infections on its own. For those whose bodies don't have the capacity to fight (like the elderly and people with underlying medical conditions), MSCs can help in fighting ARDS and lung disease.