Jump to content
World's Largest Herpes Support Group
steel_panther

Phylogica

Recommended Posts

KG303

Does anyone have more info on if this could help treat herpes if you already have it? I read that it’s just for prevention but I thought they were going to test it in animal models sometime soon, as the company actually replied to someone on this forums email. Either way this is great. Transmission is my main concern. If everyone gets vaccinated against herpes and it actually works, I won’t have to think about transmitting it every time I’m intimate :) and maybe it can help with symptoms. Fingers crossed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Forest

Attached is some information on the same Philogica subject. You can get more insights on the discussion from the Research section of this site.

mcmich     99

84c1e40ea0e759e3f1505eb1788ddf3c_default

Hi

The CEO already responded to my e-mail. This vaccine has not been tested as a therapeutic vaccine. So CAS9 is correct that this vaccine protects uninfected individuals (or mice in this case). Whether or not it helps people already infected will require further testing and study. Again, just my understanding of the human body (not my field) is that your body never kills neurons,. You need them to talk, move, tell your heart to beat, etc. So once infected, this vaccine will not cure you. It may be helpful to reduce OB's and shedding. It will be at least 2 years before they start any human testing. So, again, 10-15 years if all go well.

Going to do a follow up e-mail to have ask if someone can explain how this peptide vaccine can help intracellularly. Since the viral DNA is integrated into the cell DNA, the only way to remove it is through CAS9/sgRNA. It needs to be cut out of the DNA sequence in the cell.

Edited December 31, 2018 by mcmich
Like

mcmich     99

84c1e40ea0e759e3f1505eb1788ddf3c_default

Response from CEO

"Hi Mark,

 
It's a very complicated area and I don't profess to understand the details even of our own program (fortunately we have team members who do). The short answer to your question in relation to a therapeutic vaccine (ie. vaccine after viral exposure) is that we don't know because we haven't yet tried it - the models we have published to date relate solely to the prophylactic setting (ie. vaccine before viral exposure). The theory of viral clearance, however, remains the same if we can stimulate a sufficiently large immune response. We will assess whether we can achieve this therapeutic objective in 2019.
 
We have additional questions to answer before we can put forward our best shot at developing a cure. For example:
- which adjuvant should we be using;
- which antigens elicit the most effective immune response;
- do we need to a use a targeting moiety for the antigen presenting cells we are seeking to deliver to;
- how frequently do we need to dose etc.
 
With respect to what's going on at the cellular level - again, very complex from my understanding but the immune response captures the virus in two stages (both extracellular movement around the body and intracellularly once it has infected a host cell - see the article below for a good overview):
 
 
On the type of HSV we are modelling, we are using HSV-1 at the minute. Really, though, we are just looking at the ability of our CPPs to elicit the CD4+/CD8+ T-cells (agnostic of indication). The cancer and viral models are both being used for this purpose - the next one we are trialling will be in melanoma but is directed towards a competitive evaluation of the Cell Penetrating Peptide (CPP). 
 
We are about 24 months away from phase I at best but will know more about our strategic direction, lead indication and timelines after we present our data at the Keystone Conference in Vancouver in January.
 
I hope that is helpful and feel free to share with your forum.
 
Kind regards,
 
Rohan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RNY18
On 1/14/2019 at 7:41 AM, moialbalushi said:

I dont see where gen 003 is mentioned !! 

Genocea is mentioned, not Gen-003, sorry !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RNY18

This is from the presentation poster Phylogica  presented at the Keystone Conference :

"...Phylomer delivered peptide vaccine

protects against HSV infection

ª Vaccine construct contains HSV-derived gB/gD

epitopes priming an HSV-specific T cell

response

ª A single vaccination is given s.c. @ 2nmol +/-

Phylomer or control CPP in combination with

adjuvant Poly I:C

ª Phylomer-vaccine controls HSV infection

(no detectable virus) in 75% of mice..."

 

.....I tried to post the whole poster, but the attachment was too large.

It seems they are still at least 2 years away from any clinical trials, provided all goes well...

 

 

Edited by RNY18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JHenry
1 hour ago, RNY18 said:

This is from the presentation poster Phylogica  presented at the Keystone Conference :

"...Phylomer delivered peptide vaccine

protects against HSV infection

ª Vaccine construct contains HSV-derived gB/gD

epitopes priming an HSV-specific T cell

response

ª A single vaccination is given s.c. @ 2nmol +/-

Phylomer or control CPP in combination with

adjuvant Poly I:C

ª Phylomer-vaccine controls HSV infection

(no detectable virus) in 75% of mice..."

 

.....I tried to post the whole poster, but the attachment was too large.

It seems they are still at least 2 years away from any clinical trials, provided all goes well...

 

Thanks for posting—do they make any mention of potential therapeutic application?  Thanks,  Henry.

1 hour ago, RNY18 said:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RNY18

I had written to the CEO and gotten this reply :

"...At this stage they are prophylactic only (we have not yet tried in a therapeutic setting but, theoretically, the approach should work better - it is a killer T cell that drives the outcome not a memory response).
 
All going well we would still have a 24 month journey ahead to the clinic..."


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JHenry
33 minutes ago, RNY18 said:

I had written to the CEO and gotten this reply :

"...At this stage they are prophylactic only (we have not yet tried in a therapeutic setting but, theoretically, the approach should work better - it is a killer T cell that drives the outcome not a memory response).
 
All going well we would still have a 24 month journey ahead to the clinic..."


 

 

Thank you for the prompt, positive response!!  Henry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RNY18

Check my post regarding Drs. Bloom & Cullen's work.

When will any of this cease being science fiction and make it into the marketplace ?

So frustrating....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • The Hive is Thriving!

    • Total Topics
      69,563
    • Total Posts
      468,604
  • Posts

    • viralfrog
      I would not be the first one, plenty of others here on the forum who get recurrent OBs despite heavy doses of antivirals. The blisters appear exactly in/around the spot where I had my first OB 4 years ago, plus all the symptoms I have are those commonly described as HSV-2 symptoms. In my opinion, it's a clear case.  But your suggestion is definitely an option that should not be ruled out. I'll wait until I get a bad enough OB again so I can go get another swab test. The outbreak needs to be bad enough to be able to break the blisters to get the liquid from inside right? I recall hearing something like this when I got tested years ago. The doctor used a swab that had tiny needles on it that would pop the blisters open. Do you know if this is right, i.e. you will not get a positive swab just from a mild OB / redness? 
    • jreemi
      90% elimination of the latent virus in thr ganglia probably will be a functional cure. Sure the small remaining amount can reactivate, but thete is a viral load threshhold for transmission. More than likely that won't be enough to cause transmission, or enough shedding for transmission. Damage enough of the latent virus and we are good to go. There is already a Crispr trial on humans going on right now https://newatlas.com/crispr-trial-underway-vertex-gene-therapy/58643/ So we are just waiting on Keith Jerome's lab and Excision Biotherapeutics to begin their trials. I've beem following Crispr for years now, and it keeps gettimg more accurate. I believe researchers at Duke have recently made a big breakthrough on accuracy, by changing the level of regulation instead of cutting DNA. I wonder if these labs collaborate with others such as Jerome's?
    • WilsoInAus
      No need to be tired at all, I'm sorry of you cannot accept the facts surrounding testing, but here they are. Your note is full of inaccuracies so let's iron those out. I don't need you to believe anything, I am just putting the facts out there. Here's a few studies: https://jcm.asm.org/content/37/5/1632 Here we have 29 patients with recent HSV-2 infection... 100% turned positive, 0% false negatives. https://jcm.asm.org/content/36/3/845/figures-only Here we have over 1,000 positive samples from people who have swabbed positive and compared to three different blood tests - over 95% accurate. https://jcm.asm.org/content/26/4/662?ijkey=9ebe349f98ed94f019ed788604c8fa19864a2c7e&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha Here we have 76 people who swabbed positive, the Westernblot detected 99% and an immunoblot 96%. Can you elaborate what is vague about these items of research. I'm sure now you'll want to review the references to these papers where you'll find even more. Some of them are in easy text for the beginner. So you stand corrected, it is in fact your comments that are spreading misinformation. That is not tolerated on this website. Also what nonsense that people do not get lesions to swab upon infection? Where did you read that? Hello Dolly? I'm afraid it is back to the books for you to do some more research before having such a rambunctious spew like above. STOP IT - we are all tired of your unsubstantiated drivel. This is 2019 we want something tangible, something real, something sound and wholesome and not drooling rants equal of the park bench antics of the drunks at 2am Sunday morning! I will NEVER stop because no matter how immature, how bombastic, how fantastic, how inaccurate, how frivolous, how false the spew that ends up on this website - the TRUTH will always be the light, the love, the guidance, the deliverance and the justice... no matter how many capitalised swear words are thrown!
    • Talx2520
      I took an IgG blood test 6 months after the episode. HSV-2 was negative (less than .91) and HSV-1 was high at 3.18
    • RainyDay2
      My comment was about THE BLOOD TEST!  You’re 95-100% accuracy for it?  Garbage.  Pure garbage.  You might as well have pulled that number out of your ass. Google search HIV accuracy... almost every medical site will tell you 4th generation HIV testing is as close to 99.9% percent you can possibly get after a certain period of elapsed time.  They will pretty much GUARANTEE you that you are indeed negative if you have a negative test. That defined certainty of accuracy WILL NOT AND CAN NOT be found for HSV blood tests.  You get vague descriptions of it’s accuracy from almost every site you visit.  NO CERTAINTIES.  Thousands of us on these forums KNOW the test isn’t accurate. When your score is between 1.1 and 3.5, this could be a false positive.  Certain sites list almost 1 in 2 tests can be false positives.  50 fucking percent!! And you want me to believe the test is 95-100% accurate? How come so many sites also seem to dance around the possibility of false negatives?   All that isn’t necessary in HIV testing.  Because if YOU DO get a low positive, the confirmatory HIV test checks for the actual VIRUS in your system.   And there are almost NO FALSE NEGATIVES.    NO HSV BLOOD TEST CAN DO THAT! Not even the Western Blot.  At the end of the day, it’s just a more detailed look at antibodies.  And many sites will tell you a “small” number of people may never develop. How small are we talking???? That can be any number.   Trash. And again, a large margin of people with herpes DO NOT GET LESIONS to be swabbed.  Google tells you that.  If majority of herpes infected have nothing to swab,  well that pretty much makes PCRs and cultures worthless for the most part doesn’t it?  If there is nothing to swab after a year, in your words, you are clear of herpes. BULLSHIT! So Wilso, just stop it.  You have never done scientific testing in a lab yourself on herpes. You are not a doctor.  You are constantly telling people false information.  Assuring them of promises you have no authority to make.  I’ve seen you do it time and time again.  Do you have regrets???????????  Im tired of your lies.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.