I really have difficulties in understanding your logic. Replicor is a very small company with no income because they have no products, yet. They believe they have a cure, but to prove it is a cure, they have to do large and very expensive clinical trials. So the existing small band of shareholders have to dig deep into their own pockets to fund the limited clinical trials. They believe in their invention and are willing to take the risk because it can fail, then they will be out of pocket, not to mention the years of hard work.
Your logic assumes they have a cure, but how can they, or anyone, know that it is a cure? How can they go to the media and say they have a cure? They are responsible scientists, not quacks. So they do the right thing and report their results in reputable scientific conferences.
So the suggestion that they are holding back is just plain ridiculous. As I have said on previous posts, I am very grateful to the company for continuing to risk their own money in finding out whether they have an effective treatment for hbv. For our sake, I hope they will be rewarded handsomely.
I agree with Stephen. I don't think Replicor is "holding back". Whether one likes it or not, a potential drug HAS TO go through expensive clinical trials before it reaches the market. And Replicor simply doesn't have the money right now to fund these very expensive big trials. We cannot "purge" the drug out when it is not a legal drug yet.
1. If the trial is really risky, how Myrcludex-b project has a funding from venture capitalist? I think it's because there is enormous upside potential if it turns out to be successful. Even though some investors are conservative and do not want to put their money in risky project, there are always investors which have different risk tolerance.
2. They can have clinical trials in other countries than in United States to prove their idea with much lower cost. For example, let's take China. If it succeeds in clinical trials in the market, it will be enough to be profitable and they can return to US market much easily. Is it difficult to find Chinese investors or pharmas who can conduct the trials with them? I do not think so.
3. Why European governments such as Russia backs Myrcludex-B project? This issue is in the public area. How large portion of population are infected and how many lives are lost every year? How much money is spent every year in clinical trials for non-life threatening disease?
If this happens in China, their government is already planning extensive clinical trials to prove this idea.
4. Google up "Replicor" and "Bird-flu". You can find in 2005, the company made press release that they found potential new drugs against bird-flu(H5N1). Their CEO told AFP.
Canadian pharmaceutical firm Replicor has discovered a compound to treat influenza infections that could potentially be used to fight the deadly H5N1 bird flu, the company's chief executive officer told AFP. Okay, I just post link.
They already have experience in using media. I don't want to call them quacks for the reason. Responsible scientist can also use media for their purpose. I just guess this time they are not so desperate for funding watching they do not use media.
Nobody can purge illegal drug from them. Don't worry. Shouldn't they be rewarded? No. They deserve it. Media exposure will endanger them? No.
They just will be under more scrutiny by public eyes. Nothing can be lost unless Replicor really has intention to hold back for big investors.
1. Investment is drug development is a balance between risk and benefit. The perception of risk and benefit is subjective. So just because someone is willing to invest a large sum in a potential drug, it does not mean the drug is a dead certainty. I cite the case of BMS that invested over 1 billion dollar in a drug that went through a very promising phase II, only to write off the complete investment several months later. Now BMS is a very big and experienced pharma. THe corollary to this is that just because no big sum is invested in a drug does not mean it has no potential.
2. FYI, Replicor conducts their clinical trials in Bangladesh. Is it difficult to find investors in China? Before I answer that question, let me say it is not easy to conduct clinical trials and sell drugs in China, they also have a sFDA. Even Tenofovir is required to undergo clinical trials again in China before it can be sold in China. Sure, there are wealthy private and public investors, but do they all want to invest in the risky drug development business? Are wealthy investors more stupid or more clever than investors in the West?
3. I don't know where you get the idea that the Russian government is backing Myrcludex. I thought it is a joint venture between two venture companies. As for China, with the high prevalence of HepB, its government spent large sum of money on fundamental research. Like all wise governments, they leave the risky business to private individuals, for the simple reason that governments have no more expertise in deciding whether a potential drug will be successful than anybody else.
4. If you take the time to learn about Replicor (all on their website), you would know that Replicor has a genral technology NAP (Nucleic Acid Based Polymer), " NAPs were discovered at REPLICor in 2002 and utilize the unique, sequence independent properties of phosphorothioated oligonucleotides to generate novel amphipathic polymers which have a very broad spectrum antiviral activity against enveloped viruses.
Our first NAP drug in the clinic, REP 9AC, is a first-in-class HBsAg release inhibitor in HBV infected hepatocytes ."
Different NAP compounds will have different combinations of A, C, G, T; and different biological activities. The A, C in REP9AC stands for the base A and C.
So they had a NAP compound that has the POTENTIAL to treat H5N1. Is this the compound the same as REP9AC?
"So they have experience in using media" - Is it not possible that the media is using Replicor? H5N1 was hot news then and maybe that is why the media chose to publish the claim.
"This time they are not so desperate for funding" - I don't know how you can draw this conclusion. If you do your research carefully, REP9AC was highlighted as a potential new cure at one of the leading conferences. It was specifically mentioned in a press conference by the Chairman of the conference. But did you read about it in the popular press? So it is ridiculous to think that scientists can "use" the press and that the press will be interested in anything said by scientists.
I hope not everyone is as cynical as you are in suggesting that someone can hold patients to ransom for a bigger slice of the cake.
Here are the results from the Replicor study.. http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Hepatitis-B/AASLD-2012-REP9AC/show/1818478
And I quote: "RESULTS: At the time of abstract submission, 10 out of 12 patients treated have effectively cleared serum HBsAg and anti-HBsAg antibodies have been observed in all these patients. Immunological recovery is evidenced in these patients by a 2.5 to 7 log reduction in their HBV DNA titers from pre-treatment levels after 20-30 weeks of treatment (see figure)."
"Interim results from REPLICor’s proof of concept trial were disclosed today at the 2012 held at the University of Oxford Christ Church and Examination Schools, Oxford, England. Patients who had cleared HBsAg from their blood with REP 9AC’ monotherapy were subjected to combination treatment with REP 9AC’ and either Pegasys™ or Zadaxin™.
Profound increases in anti-HBV antibodies or immune function were observed in all patients with as few as 6-10 weeks of combination treatment. Many patients have achieved HBV antibody levels seen in healthy patients after vaccination with a total of 12 weeks of combination treatment."
So before some of you say there is no cure, tell me please. Which available compound today or available drug can show these kind of results? Calling it not a drug is ridiculous.
I say approve NUCS are not drugs since their effectiveness is only 1-4% per year. But what about the associated damage with them. Yet big pharma continues to sponsor the research that is only around these compounds. So you tell me that this is not a conspiracy.
Your logic defines all reason and morals!
You sound like the big pharma lobbiest. You should be more concerned with the damage NUCS cause to people over the long term. High blood pressure, fatty liver and kidney damage on top of HBV.. That is the reality for us. As appose to just 12 weeks of therapy.
The laws are ridiculous and amoral. Lobbied by special interests that buy politicians and this is just a pure example of it if a company has a drug that can rid people from HBV but Cannot collect development funds online to precede further and faster..
Replicor has a CURE or at lest the best available. And if they need funds they need to go to the people not to a private investor shark to whom this disease is another way to profit in a big way.