stapled peptides v phylomer peptides, page-3

Hi Tony,
The article raises significant questions. Why did Genentech sign up to a study into the efficacy of stapled peptides in disease pathways in cancer? Were Genentech surprised by the findings that the two stapled peptides 'didn't perform as claimed' or did Genentech suspect beforehand that the staple didn't 'enhance cell permeability or binding affinity'?

Given the $1.1B collaboration between Aileron and Roche which included an upfront payment of $25m, these are interesting questions. But what do they have to do with Phylogica?

We have already noted that Phylogica has a similar research focus in blocking disease pathways. In the AsiaTIDES presentation there is an emphasis upon the use of phylomers as 'intracellular protein blockers'. One slide titled Track Record in Blocking Intracellular Protein Interactions, discusses the validation data against a broad range of intracellular target classes involved in inflammatory and infectious diseases and cancer.

We know that Phylogica is in discussion with Genentech over a separate deal in an area unrelated to the BBB. There is a high probability that the second deal may relate to intracellular protein blockers in cancer.

Now we can go back and answer the questions which I raised!

Regards,
Wayne