Antigenics changes name to Agenus and AG707 to HerpV

[Sweet7]

I just found out that Antigenics changed the name of the company and potential HSV vaccine. Here's the new website:

http://www.agenusbio.com/

I sure hope this will help them secure some good partners to push this vaccine on to the phase II trial.

[dinki]

I like that name better it is more professional though it kinda sounds like GSK herpevac! I'm hoping this means good things in the future!

[Teacher Man]

Good to know; thanks for the update. They can call it Rumplestiltskin or Blue Magic or whatever for all I care....

so long as there's progress! lol

[Kqk]

Why

Why is it the medical community may understand the stigma around HSV infections, but they name drugs "Herp____-"? Is this some subliminal labeling to give pride to this pariah?

My two cents

[Sweet7]

I hear ya. They should be more specific and call it something relating to HSV. Herpes is a family of viruses. I think the public should be better educated about the different types. We should all also know that everyone has some form of Herpes and that some are not harmful unless your immune system is down and that he types that are harmful should be well known to the public. Especially CMV.

[Sweet7]

Oh, and I found out what slowed down some of the progress. It happened in 2005. A scientist used a common cold virus to try to replace a defective gene in people with a rare disease and it killed someone. This vaccine isnt the same kind of thing, but it made other scientist and investors leary for a while. I really hate that someone died but am glad that lessons have been learned and that progress is picking back up.

[accelerate the response]

Hi. Both Antigenics, now called Agenus, and Genocea aim to induce a T cell response that differs to that already induced by the process of being infected with HSV in the first place.

The virus uses a complex of proteins on the surface of the infectious virion to "trick" the immune system into sensing that HSV is not a pathogen, a disease causing agent, and so allow it to infect by travelling up the nerves to assume the state known as latency in the sensory nerve endings of the face (HSV1 primarily) and the spine (HSV 2 primarily).

These planed theraputic vaccines are derived from the realisation that some people show an innate imunity to HSV despite being exposed to it over a sustained period of time - sexual partners of HSV + people who never the less do not develop disease symptons for example. It has been deduced that they show a more effective T cell immune response which disables active viral particles and does not allow the infection process to occur. The theory has it that if T cell immune response can be raised in infected individuals then they will not have recuurent "outbreaks" because the T Cells will inhibit infectious viral formation, which is what is happening during an "outbreak".

Agenus and Genocea both aim to raise the level of T cell response in already infected individuals by "teaching" the immune system to recognise aspects of the protein defence mechanism that HSV uses to defeat the body's own immune response in the first place and to develop a T cell response to the process of viral reactivation ("outbreaks"), which will prevent them from occuring.

Is this a cure? Well, technically no because the latent phase has not been eliminated in either of these two candidate vaccine's cases- there appears to be too little activity during latency, for want of a better word, to target with a pharmaceutical or vaccinating agent. But, the immune response that the proposed vaccines generate MUST be very significant in all the preclinical animal models of the disease for both companies to have raised so much funding - $35 million USD just recently in Genocea's case, for example.

'Very Significant' to my mind means that, in the great majority of cases, outbreaks cease and viral shedding is negligeable to undetectable. Anything else would not attract investor attention as it would represent merely a vaccine-derived way of replicating what Valtrex already does.

Agenus has done a phase one trial (ascending dose toxicity). Genocea has yet to do so but now has the cash in place. In each case we are perhaps three and five years respectively from a large phase three trial. IF Big Pharma backes them, and it looks as if they have with Genocea having Johnson and Johnson on board: see this link,

http://www.genocea.com/news-events/press-releases/press_release_genocea_series_b_010311.pdf

The process of using T cells to inhibit virus replication and so confine it to latency is described here:

http://www.pnas.org/content/103/13/5102.long

and the critical paragraph reads as follows:

Abstract

We have developed a vaccine strategy for generating an attenuated strain of an intracellular bacterial pathogen that, after uptake by professional antigen-presenting cells, does not replicate intracellularly and is readily killed. However, after degradation of the vaccine strain within the phagolysosome, target antigens are released into the cytosol for endogenous processing and presentation for stimulation of CD8+ effector T cells. Applying this strategy to the model intracellular pathogen Listeria monocytogenes, we show that an intracellular replication-deficient vaccine strain is cleared rapidly in normal and immunocompromised animals, yet antigen-specific CD8+ effector T cells are stimulated after immunization. Furthermore, animals immunized with the intracellular replication-deficient vaccine strain are resistant to lethal challenge with a virulent WT strain of L. monocytogenes. These studies suggest a general strategy for developing safe and effective, attenuated intracellular replication-deficient vaccine strains for stimulation of protective immune responses against intracellular bacterial pathogens.

Note that although the infecting agent is different to HSV in this case the principle still applies to HSV and this is a paper Genocea quote in their website.

In summary then - there is a lot of hope on the horizon and, for the first time in millenia, this evil, life-altering pathogen is close to being stemmed as an infectious agent.

Bloom and Cullen are taking a different approach using ribozymes to modify the host cell chemistry and so either disable the virus's capacity to cause symptons (Bloom) or act as a host to the pathogen at all (Cullen). As you now, they have combined forces to achieve this goal but their work is a lot futher out from the clinic than either Genocea or Agenus.

Bavituximab is a monoclonal antibody, not a vaccine. As such it enter the body via an infusion where it stays for a period of hours before being eliminated. It can clear active infection where the process of viral replication is ongoing and proteins that it can recognise and allow the immune system to attack are present. During latency however, it seems that there is not enough activity for the antibody to recognise and act upon as it does during active infection.

There remains the question as to whether the process of stopping active infection in its tracks enables elimination of the latent infection, in as much as reactivation of the virus, ('outbreaks'), seems to be associated with maintaining the pool, of latent infection itself. In an interview, Dr Thorpe of Bavituximab says this may be the case. Thus if active outbreaks are inhibited, by whatever means, then it MAY be the case that the latent pool of virus declines over time as well. It is interesting to see that Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, who own Bavituximab, are progressively rolling out more and more clinical trials in different areas. As yet however, they have not done so with HSV. To be clear though, Bavituximab is not a vaccine and leaves the body within hours of being administered. It may treat acute outbreaks very well, but that is not the same as inducing an antigen response to infection in the way that a vaccine does.

A quick word about the Herpes Cure Foundation:

The process of achieving non profit status with the IRS is not simple and involves lawyers and significant cash to achieve. We have achieved agreement in principle for a leading UK and US clinician to serve on the clinical advisory board and now have agreement from a UK based pharma entrepreneur who has raised funds and floated two of his own pharma companies to serve on the governing board BUT, with both Broken Princess and me working full-time, her in the 'States and myself in Europe, and with the economy as it is, we have both had to put this on hold temporarily. We have been approached by another group and we may be able to combine resources with them. We are both grateful for the support we received and will keep you posted as things develop.

[helpiamconfused2]

ATR, thanks for the update on the Herpes Cure Foundation! Please let us know if there is anything we can do to help.

With regards to Agenus/Antigenics, they are struggling financially. Their financial statements bring this to bear. This is why we need to stay on the petitions - signing and pushing all over the internet. Although Agenus/Antigenics has done a phase I, they are having difficulty finding a partner for phase II and they clearly don't have the money on their own to do it. As such, this is a chance for us to push the US gvt to help them with Phase II (to increase employment in the US while helping people affected by herpes). If we don't, a promising vaccine may sit on the shelf and go nowhere.

We've got to push to get this stuff funded. It isn't top of mind like cancer and AIDS.

http://www.petition2congress.com/387...d-cure-herpes/

http://www.petition2congress.com/373...earch-funding/

http://health.change.org/petitions/v...search_funding

[struggle83]

The theory has it that if T cell immune response can be raised in infected individuals then they will not have recuurent "outbreaks" because the T Cells will inhibit infectious viral formation, which is what is happening during an "outbreak".

ATR - What is happening during an outbreak? How do T Cells inhibit infection? I don't know of any natural mechanism in the human body to inhibit "formation". Just curious.

[Sweet7]

Struggle I must have spoke too soon on the other thread. My understanding of what ATR is saying is that those vaccines induce trained T cells to be able to see the HSV protiens once they leave the neuron. They would basically kill the virus as it is trying to replicate outside of the neurons. It's like the T cells will be able to figure out the coordinance of cells with replicating HSV and destroy them.

[Sweet7]

ATR, it is good to hear from you.

[Teacher Man]

ATR -

Thank you for all your time and effort on this site and keeping up with current research. It is greatly appreciated,

and it has not gone unnoticed. This site is a beacon of hope for the future treatments and advancements

relating to HSV. Please keep up the good work!

[accelerate the response]

1. Thank you for the supportive comments. I did not realize that Agenus was struggling to raise money. Is this also the case for Genocea? They raised £35 million just now to facilitate phase one trials.

Would either one, both being commercial companies, be able to accept government funding? Why would the government back one over the other? Would the US government, in a country where "socialized medicine" is not the norm, back any private medical venture beyond grants by the NIH/NIAID? I would be very grateful for your views.

Could it be that with two very similar concepts, risk capital is backing one and not both? I know that Genocea also licensed a variety of HSV antigens, a library if you will, from University of Washington. Does this mean that the inside track view is that Genocea may be the more efficacious of the two? Or do they just promote themselves more? They appear to have a link with Johnson and Johnson and I hope this means they have access to the funding to complete a phase two trial in due course.

Immunovex has completed a phase one trial and is I think embarking on a phase two with serodiscordant couples. They use a different technique of vaccination with a live but attenuated virus that can not replicate. In a seronegative person this may yet prove to induce an antibody response sufficient to prevent acquiring the disease but it is not yet known if it will have any effect on reducing outbreaks or shedding in those already infected. Its aim is to protect the sexual partners of those infected and not as a therapeutic. Halford's vaccine is a more potent version of the same concept that can replicate but not cause disease symptoms, and his belief is that it will take this degree of increased activity for a vaccine based on this concept to be effective in preventing infection. Because perhaps of its increased virulence this concept has yet to find a backer.

Finally, a question. To fund a preclinical effort to get to pre-phase phase one IND trials needs perhaps $200,000 to cover a researcher and animals for testing in the standard animal models of the infection - mice and Guinea Pigs. To fund a phase one/early stage two trial needs perhaps $50 million USD. Does anyone think that if a not for profit is set up we could get anywhere near those figures in donations, honestly? To what extent does the community beyond this bulletin board care enough to donate? Can we hazard a guess?

[Sweet7]

That’s a very good question ATR. I’ve been wondering that myself. After looking at how the petitions are going, I would say it would take a while. However, donating to a ligit foundatation may bring more interest. The only thing I can think of is to survey the users on this forum and other forums to see if people would pledge to donate money to such an organization.

[Sweet7]

Ok, I started a thread to ask the question on here. I will put out the same question in the hidden fb groups I'm in and let you know how many replies I get. Were looking at possibly over 1200 people in that group. I am working on putting together a list for all the local yahoo groups but have't completed that list. I am only asking if people would make a donation, not how much.

[helpiamconfused2]

1. Thank you for the supportive comments. I did not realize that Agenus was struggling to raise money. Is this also the case for Genocea? They raised £35 million just now to facilitate phase one trials.

Would either one, both being commercial companies, be able to accept government funding? Why would the government back one over the other? Would the US government, in a country where "socialized medicine" is not the norm, back any private medical venture beyond grants by the NIH/NIAID? I would be very grateful for your views.

Could it be that with two very similar concepts, risk capital is backing one and not both? I know that Genocea also licensed a variety of HSV antigens, a library if you will, from University of Washington. Does this mean that the inside track view is that Genocea may be the more efficacious of the two? Or do they just promote themselves more? They appear to have a link with Johnson and Johnson and I hope this means they have access to the funding to complete a phase two trial in due course.

Immunovex has completed a phase one trial and is I think embarking on a phase two with serodiscordant couples. They use a different technique of vaccination with a live but attenuated virus that can not replicate. In a seronegative person this may yet prove to induce an antibody response sufficient to prevent acquiring the disease but it is not yet known if it will have any effect on reducing outbreaks or shedding in those already infected. Its aim is to protect the sexual partners of those infected and not as a therapeutic. Halford's vaccine is a more potent version of the same concept that can replicate but not cause disease symptoms, and his belief is that it will take this degree of increased activity for a vaccine based on this concept to be effective in preventing infection. Because perhaps of its increased virulence this concept has yet to find a backer.

Finally, a question. To fund a preclinical effort to get to pre-phase phase one IND trials needs perhaps $200,000 to cover a researcher and animals for testing in the standard animal models of the infection - mice and Guinea Pigs. To fund a phase one/early stage two trial needs perhaps $50 million USD. Does anyone think that if a not for profit is set up we could get anywhere near those figures in donations, honestly? To what extent does the community beyond this bulletin board care enough to donate? Can we hazard a guess?

ATR, can you post our petitions on your HCF site?

http://www.petition2congress.com/387...d-cure-herpes/

http://www.petition2congress.com/373...earch-funding/

http://health.change.org/petitions/v...search_funding