Couch, yes and no. Why?
Well the YES part is of course for the PURE and ISOLATED fact of increasing the foot-print. That is certainly one part that PPHM has stated themselves and which is proven by the many clinical trials and possibly (we don't know) also by the Bavi+Yervoy test. But as you heard Dr Wolchok say if you watched the video, one must used SURVIVAL as an end-point because progression first goes forward (while strangely the patient feels better) and later while survival advances (melanoma 6 towards 2 years and more) the tumor regresses. Hence Bavi+Yervoy results could be kept in the barrel for it to demonstrate clear signs (although the test is marked as ended). We will see.
But PPHM is after more then just foot-print. Bavituximab has two other very important qualities. And this is going to need some explanation otherwise some people are going to be confused with what Dr. Wolchok said.
Dr Wolchok said that patients that developed infections had BETTER results that those that didn't. Here is why. In the tumor environment PS blocks immune system activation. However if immune system activation can be triggered by ANOTHER CAUSE besides the cancer then it increases the chances of the immune system to see the cancer and attack it.
Yet Bavituximab has the INVERSE EFFECT. It REDUCES infections because it acts as well on the MDSC as on the Macrophages. And in general medicine no or less infections is BETTER. How does that fit with Dr. Wolchok's finding?
Well very simple. Bavituximab has a 3RD weapon on board that allows it to bind Fx-Gamma. So it not only BLOCKS IMMUNE SYSTEM SUPPRESSION but it ALSO starts IMMUNE SYSTEM STIMULATION. And so that function (immune system stimulation) is actually what also happens by the infections Wolchok was talking about. So the STIMULATORY function makes the need for infections obsolete.
And, the immune system DOES NOT learn of its own each time T-cell do some attacking. The immune system must be activate (stimulated) to start producing extra T-cells and OTHER CELLS that will take care of the learning to prevent relapse. In a next occurrence the immune system cells that have been created as specialists to detect THAT type of cancer will NOT be fooled by PS or any other suppressing (because they have no PS receptor).
The end result for PPHM endeavour for Bavituximab/BetaBodies is therefore IMO 3-fold :
#1) Increased Foot-Print for other IO treatements (anti-PD-1, anti-CTLA-4, ...) as a first property for bavituximab in combinations.
#2) Less or less intensive infections for patients as a second effect which is more comfort and less OTHER cause of death of side effects of main IO drugs.
#3) Relapse prevention as an IMPORTANT third because no relapse after complete response is what I would call "A CURE".
Now, Couch, all this being said you are absolutely right pointing out foot-print as it will be the #1 argument to which BP will listen. They'll like #2 to sell it and they may not be jumping of happiness of #3. AIMO
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals the Microsoft of Biotechnology! All In My Opinion. I am not advising anything, nor accusing anyone.
