Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
China bird flu analysis finds more virus threats lurking
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/21/us-birdflu-china-threat-idUSBRE97K0W620130821
Will Immunotherapy Disrupt The Oncology Market?
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/082013/will-immunotherapy-disrupt-oncology-market.asp?partner=YahooSA
could you post the link
Genetronics Acquires Inovio AS
To think this cash poor company (gentronics) paid a total of $10,000,000 to Inovio AS In January 2005 for their intellectual property and DNA ELECTRORATION PATENTS and now its all owned by INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, every thing is now falling into place for INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, they control the largest worldwide portfolio (over 400 patents) in this game changing science, and the delivery system is the key to it all, holding strong with my 400,000 shares
http://ir.inovio.com/index.php?s=43&item=91
Genetronics Acquires Inovio AS
To think this cash poor company (gentronics) paid a total of $10,000,000 to Inovio AS In January 2005 for their intellectual property and DNA ELECTRORATION PATENTS and now its all owned by INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, every thing is now falling into place for INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, they control the largest worldwide portfolio (over 400 patents) in this game changing science, and the delivery system is the key to it all, holding strong with my 400,000 shares
http://www.sddt.com/Search/article.cfm?SourceCode=20050126cza#.UhDbjdbD8-g
Inovio had the electroporation intellectual property and technology that VGX Pharmaceuticals craved
I consider Inovio to be a 4 year old company,VGX already having their own electroporation device (CELLECTRAtm) they only lacked 1 thing, the patents that Inovio biomedical controlled, NOW THEY HAVE THE SECREET SAUCE, with their SYN-CON PLATFORM and PIPELINE of world changing DNA VACCINES WE CAN ALL ENJOY THE RIDE
http://www.indusbusinessjournal.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=0AE74D3DE6B34463A40504A0F0F458F6
Subsequent Events
Subsequent to June 30, 2013, the Company sold 4,248,455 shares of common stock under its ATM Sales Agreement for net proceeds of $6.1 million.
Subsequent to June 30, 2013, warrants to purchase 5,273,392 shares of common stock were exercised for total proceeds to the Company of $5.3 million.
NOW THERE'S A TOTAL CASH POSITION OF $36,000,000 in the TREASURY, NO DILUTION FOR A LONG LONG TIME
INOVIO Could put $14,100,000 In the treasury, only 10,900,000 has been taken out of the 25,000,000 ATM option available and I'm sure they have
In June 2012, the Company entered into an "at-the-market" (ATM) sales agreement (the “Sales Agreement”) with an outside placement agent (the “Placement Agent”) to sell shares of its common stock with aggregate gross proceeds of up to $25.0 million from time to time, through an ATM equity offering program under which the Placement Agent will act as sales agent. Under the Sales Agreement, the Company will set the parameters for the sale of shares, including the number of shares to be issued, the time period during which sales are requested to be made, limitation on the number of shares that may be sold in any one trading day and any minimum price below which sales may not be made. The Sales Agreement provides that the Placement Agent will be entitled to compensation for its services in an amount equal to 3.0% of the gross proceeds from the sales of shares sold through the Placement Agent under the Sales Agreement. The Company has no obligation to sell any shares under the Sales Agreement, and may at any time suspend solicitation and offers under the Sales Agreement.
During the three months ended March 31, 2013, the Company sold a total of 8,222,966 shares of common stock under the ATM Sales Agreement. The sales were made at a weighted average price of $0.70 per share with net proceeds to the Company of $5.6 million.
During the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company sold a total of 9,344,611 shares of common stock under the ATM Sales Agreement. The sales were made at a weighted average price of $0.59 per share with net proceeds to the Company of $5.3 million.
INOVIO COULD PUT $12,149,800 in the treasury if Marx Austin exercised these options, Which I believed they did
On January 27, 2011, we entered into investor purchase agreements with investors relating to the issuance and sale of (a) 21,130,400 shares of common stock, and (b) warrants to purchase a total of 10,565,200 shares of common stock with an exercise price of $1.40 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $24.3 million. The shares of common stock and warrants were sold in units, consisting of one share of common stock and a warrant to purchase 0.50 of a share of common stock, at a purchase price of $1.15 per unit. The warrants have a five-year term from the date of issuance and are first exercisable commencing on the 180th day after the date of issuance. We may call the warrants if the closing bid price of the common stock has been at least $2.80 over 20 trading days and certain other conditions are met. We received net proceeds from the transaction of approximately $23.0 million, after deducting the placement agent’s fee and other offering expenses.
New bird flu H7N9: Human-to-human transmission reported
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-57597397/new-bird-flu-h7n9-human-to-human-transmission-reported/
deadly H7N9 virus has been transmitted between humans
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-08/07/bird-flu-human-to-human
repost from kyle.ramer on the Yahoo mesage board Published OnlineFirst July 17...inovio has been busy
Highly optimized DNA vaccine targeting human telomerase reverse transcriptase stimulates potent antitumor immunity
Jian Yan1, Panyupa Pankhong2, Thomas H Shin2, Nyamekye Obeng-Adjei2, Matthew P Morrow3, Jewell N Walters2, Amir S Khan3, Niranjan Y. Sardesai3, and David B Weiner2,*
- Author Affiliations
1Research and Development, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
2Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Pennsylvania
3Product Development, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
?* Corresponding Author:
David B Weiner, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 422 Curie Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA, United States dbweiner@mail.med.upenn.edu
Abstract
High levels of human Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase (hTERT) are detected in over 85% of human cancers. Immunological analysis supports hTERT is a widely applicable target recognized by T cells and can be potentially studied as a broad cancer immune therapeutic, or a unique line of defense against tumor recurrence. There remains an urgent need to develop more potent hTERT vaccines. Here, a synthetic highly optimized full-length hTERT DNA vaccine (phTERT) was designed and the induced immunity was examined in mice and non-human primates. When delivered by electroporation, phTERT elicited strong, broad hTERT-specific CD8 responses including induction of T-cells expressing CD107a, IFN-? and TNF-a in mice. The ability of phTERT to overcome tolerance was evaluated in a NHP model, whose TERT is 96% homologous to that of hTERT. Immunized monkeys exhibited robust (average 1834 SFU/106 PBMCs), diverse (multiple immunodominant epitopes) IFN-? responses and antigen-specific perforin release (average 332 SFU/106 PBMCs), suggesting phTERT breaks tolerance and induces potent cytotoxic responses in this human relevant model. Moreover, in an HPV16-associated tumor model, vaccination of phTERT slows tumor growth and improves survival rate in both prophylactic and therapeutic studies. Lastly, in vivo cytotoxicity assay confirmed that phTERT-induced CD8 T cells exhibited specific CTL activity, capable of eliminating hTERT-pulsed target cells. These findings support that this synthetic EP-delivered DNA phTERT may have a role as a broad therapeutic cancer vaccine candidate.
Received January 21, 2013.
Revision received May 29, 2013.
Accepted July 11, 2013. Published OnlineFirst July 17, 2013; doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-13-0001
Copyright © 2013, American Association for Cancer Research.
Here's a link from Sierra world equity about a meeting with PFIZER (PFE)
http://www.sierraworldequityreview.com/2013/07/14/vested-interest-sierra-was-correct-as-pfizer-pfe-hiv-research-team-to-meet-with-inovio-pharmaceuticals-inc-ino-in-pennsylvania-on-thursday-july-25th-ventures-sierra-world-equity-review-promis/
ELECTROPORATION HIV STUDY
http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/07/01/infdis.jit236.short
JULY HIV RELEASE STUDY FOR T_CELL RESONCE RATES ARE OVER 89% STATES DR.KIM at 10:24 on this video presentation, this makes the second study that T-CELL RESPONCE RATES ARE OVER 89% (IT CAN'T LUCK)
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/35014739
ELECTROPORATION study Published: May 29, 2013 and to think INOVIO has the best patent library in the world (BIG THINGS ARE ABOUT TO HAPPEN)
http://www.intechopen.com/books/advances-in-micro-nano-electromechanical-systems-and-fabrication-technologies/electroporation-based-drug-delivery-and-its-applications
FROM A KOREAN WEBSITE concerning VGXI
http://board.moneta.co.kr/cgi-bin/paxBulletin/bulView.cgi?mode=list&boardid=011000&code=011000&frame=analysis&page=1&billId=136849845829267
translated it reads
Minimally Invasive Electroporation of Synthetic DNA Vaccines for the Induction CTL and Functional Humoral Immune Responses Against HIV
Megan Wise, Karuppiah Muthumani, Kate E. Broderick, Amir S. Khan, Janess Mendoza, Maria Yang, Jian Yan, Natalie Hutnick, Niranjan Y. Sardesai, David B. Weiner. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Inovio, Blue Bell, PA
It is important to develop new approaches to HIV that generate both Functional antibody responses as well as CTL capable of killing diverse viruses. We have recently reported strong T cell and antibody responses induced in a humans using a synthetic HPV DNA vaccine delivered by a highly efficient EP (Bagarazzi et al STM 2012). Furthermore, in a study with the HVTN, recent clinical data from the HIV Vaccine Trials Network, HVTN-080 reported that CELLECTRA®-5P intramuscular electroporation (EP) of our synthetic Clade B consensus DNA HIV antigens (Env, Gag, and Pol) along with the plasmid adjuvant IL-12 generated strong antigen-specific cellular immune responses in humans resulting in a 90% response rate (Kalams et al 2013 MS in review). Here we build on these results by development of minimally invasive EP delivery technologies (MID-EP) to target the dermal tissue and by improved plasmid construct design of a collection of synthetic Consensus and center of tree (COT) immunogens. We report the ability of these approaches to generate strong binding, ADCC activity and neutralizing antibody (Ab) responses in guinea pigs, and rabbits as well as in preliminary NHP studies. We observed induction of invivo CTL/killing activity against 20 diverse HIV viruses including primary HIV isolates induced by the vaccine using a novel invivo killing assay. Furthermore we observe NAb titers engendered by immunization against a panel of 15 Tier-1 HIV viruses from Clades A-D in the range of 20 -200 in the Tzm-Bl neutralization assay. The magnitude of the humoral response was boosted to 20-1000 range using a MID-EP DNA prime-protein boost regimen. Our results suggest that study of construct design and selection by minimally invasive electroporation devices appears to be a relevant strategy for HIV DNA vaccinations in a prophylactic model targeting HIV. Combined with the design of novel HIV consensus based Env antigens these DNA-EP combination vaccines should be further investigated and have important implications for DNA vaccine candidates targeting HIV and other difficult pathogens.
Keywords: Non-Viral Gene Delivery; Vaccines; Synthetic Gene Delivery Systems
Date/Time: Friday, May 17, 2013 - 5:30 PM
Room: Exhibit Hall C/D
*Seasonal Flu (H5N1 + H1N1)-Report interim phase I clinical data (1H 2013): ?? ??!!
*HIV type-1 clades A and C-Initiate phase I clinical trial 1H 2013
*Prostate cancer-Initiate phase I clinical trial (1H 2013)
*Cervical Dysplasia expect results late 2013
*Leukemia additional phase II data (2013)
*Hepatitis C virus therapeutic INO-8000 HCV Phase I/IIa (2H 2013)
THE VALUE OF INOVIO TODAY???????
I've found a link to a company Okairos Just purchased by GlaxoSmithKline for $321,000,000 heres their Webpage http://www.okairos.com/e/index.php using a dna based approach to everything they do, very similar to Inovio and (7) of their vaccines are in pre clinical or stage 1 clinical trials, (2) of their trials are in mid phase 2 clinical trials, as you can see in their Pipeline they do not offer electroporation delivery technologies such as MedPulser, Elgen and CELLECTRA® electroporation systems. or a Platform such as SynCon® such as Inovio for their ability to create best t-cell responses (both CD4+ and CD8+): ever documented, If this purchase for $321,000,000 by GlaxoSmithKline what can Inovio possible be worth? http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/29/glaxosmithkline-okairos-idUSL5N0EA1TB20130529 if been told by people close to Inovio that it would take over $800,000,000 and its starting to seem very appropriate to me
I'd enjoy your feedback on what you think the value of INOVIO is today
Meet the Biotech CEO With a $30 Billion Breakthru
an article a fews months old is very Relevent today
http://moneymorning.com/2013/01/17/meet-the-biotech-ceo-with-a-30-billion-breakthrough/
AND JUST THINK IF ANY OF THE CLINICAL STUDIES ARE POSSITIVE WERE AT $2-5 a share In a blink
GLTA
"Johns Hopkins Scientist Slams Flu Vaccine"
Just one of the reasons why the SynCon® PLATFORM with the patent protected Electroporation Delivery SYSTEM is so needed in the world today!!!!! and just to think this stock will be in the 2s with in 6 weeks GLTA
http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/Headline/influenza-virus-flu-vaccine-Peter-Doshi-Ph-D-/2013/05/16/id/504942?s=al&promo_code=13895-1
DNA VACCINE DELIVERY PIONEERS FROM INOVIO
Meet the two world-class scientists behind Inovio’s breakthrough platform... this article is from 2008 but still relevant
DNA VACCINE DELIVERY PIONEERS FROM INOVIO
Meet the two world-class scientists behind Inovio’s breakthrough platform... this article is from 2008 but still relevant
http://ww1.aegis.org/files/bw/2008/BW080824_in_vivo_electroporatio
n_pioneers.pdf
IT AMAZES HOW MBA,PhD. DR.JOSEPH J. KIM has put this company together from a little 2 man company at VGX in 2002 with Basically no money to what we know as of today Inovio Pharmaceuticals
I ONLY WISH MORE PEOPLE WOULD POST LINKS TO INFORMATION LIKE THIS
IT AMAZES HOW MBA,PhD. DR.JOSEPH J. KIM has put this company together from a little 2 man company at VGX in 2002 with Basically no money to what we know as of today Inovio Pharmaceuticals
I ONLY WISH MORE PEOPLE WOULD POST LINKS TO INFORMATION LIKE THIS
DNA VACCINE DELIVERY PIONEERS FROM INOVIO
Meet the two world-class scientists behind Inovio’s breakthrough platform... this article is from 2008 but still relevant
http://ww1.aegis.org/files/bw/2008/BW080824_in_vivo_electroporatio
n_pioneers.pdf
IT AMAZES HOW MBA,PhD. DR.JOSEPH J. KIM has put this company together from a little 2 man company at VGX in 2002 with Basically no money to what we know as of today Inovio Pharmaceuticals
I ONLY WISH MORE PEOPLE WOULD POST LINKS TO INFORMATION LIKE THIS
An Interview with Annie De Groot, MD – Vaccine Researcher
How far has the industry come over the last decade in optimizing issues related to vaccine production, delivery and safety?
http://www.epivax.com/blog/an-interview-with-annie-de-groot-md-vaccine-researcher/
Tell us how you decided to become a vaccine researcher.
I always tell people that I learned the importance of vaccines in the back of a Toyota truck. The truck was transporting two small children and their mom to a mission hospital, from a remote Congolese village. I was a medical student at that time, working to vaccinate children against measles. In this case, our team arrived too late, and the village children already had measles. What happened next was that one of the two sickest children died on the way back to the hospital. Her mother was heartbroken.
Even then, measles was completely preventable, but lack of access to vaccines and the need for refrigeration impeded distribution of the vaccine. That experience shaped my career. I have been dedicated to the development of vaccines that are affordable, accessible, safe, and transportable ever since.
What are you most excited about in the field, recently?
I’m really very excited about how the Institute for Immunology and Informatics at University of Rhode Island (URI’s iCubed), is coming together. As you know, we only started it a few years ago, but we’ve already been able to develop and validate immunoinformatics tools that dramatically accelerate development of vaccines directly from genomic sequences, even as we pay close attention to aspects of vaccine design that will improve their safety profiles. We are now turning our collective attention to transforming these discoveries into products, leading to the production and deployment of vaccines that will have a significant impact on global and individual health. There is hard work left to do, but I think we have a Hepatitis C vaccine on the launch pad, along with a vaccine against Helicobacter pylori, a type of bacteria that can cause stomach cancer.
What’s the source of funding for your research, and who are you working with?
I’m lucky to work in two very different places. On the one hand, I work at EpiVax, a ‘boutique’ vaccine design company located in Providence. EpiVax is an innovative think tank for new approaches, and has turned that creative thinking into commercial success. Most of the funding for EpiVax comes from SBIR grants and contracts from large Pharma companies. The company has a great group of scientists, including Lenny Moise and Bill Martin who are thought leaders in the arena of vaccine design.
I also work at the University of Rhode Island’s Institute for Immunology and Informatics. The institute has received significant support through the Collaborative Centers for Human Immunology (CCHI, DAID, NIAID) for the discovery and development of epitope-driven vaccines. When Alan Rothman joined the group in 2011, the Institute expanded to 20 faculty and staff researchers. Our two paths have very nicely converged to this point from very different directions. He brings extensive knowledge of immune responses to viruses and a deep repertoire of immunology assay experience, while I can contribute my experience in translational vaccine research. Denice Spero, who was formerly a senior scientist at a local biotech company, has been helping the team with vaccine development, project management, patent filings, and translational research planning. Together, we will move our pipeline of well-developed vaccine programs to the clinic.
What’s new about your approach to vaccines?
At EpiVax and now at the iCubed, our focus has been on defining the ‘minimum essential components’ of vaccines, sort of like ‘nouvelle cuisine’ (I am sure people know what I mean when I use that analogy). Until 15 to 20 years ago, people still made vaccines using what we call the ‘shake and bake’ approach, turning whole bacterial cultures into vaccines by killing them with heat or chemicals. By that I mean growing up bacteria in big flasks (images of Louis Pasteur and his goose-neck flasks should come to mind) and then baking it, or killing it with chemical treatments, and injecting the whole (dead) bacteria or virus into a person.
We’ve come a long way since “shake and bake” was the only way to make vaccines. In my group, we’ve been working on taking apart the bacteria and viruses and stripping vaccines down to the very essence of a vaccine, or just the parts that are needed.
We like to say that a vaccine can be made out of three components: ‘Payload’ (the information that tells the immune system to fight against a specific pathogen) + Adjuvant (the danger signal needed to trigger a response) + delivery vehicle (the packaging that gets the vaccine to the right place in the body).
Recombinant vaccines offer a number of wonderful advantages over the shake and bake methods of the past. For one thing, It’s now possible to identify the ‘critical antigens’ or key proteins that are important for immune defense against pathogens, in many cases, and these key proteins can be produced in using methods that are more easily replicable and quality controlled than ‘shake and bake’, and faster, and in higher volume.
There are other significant disadvantages to the ‘shake and bake’ method that include poor immunogenicity and potentially adverse reactions to the proteins or lipids in the mixture. And, from a purely immunological standpoint, the amount of information being delivered to the immune system was probably unnecessary, if not excessive. Not that the immune system can’t handle it, but we’re beginning to rethink the whole concept of ‘whole protein’ and, beyond that ‘whole bacteria’ or virus, because we are finding evidence that immune responses overlap, between bacteria and their hosts. So, if you really think about it, we should probably be stripping vaccines down to the bare minimum.
So we can reduce the amount of information that is being put into vaccines to the minimal amount that is necessary, potentially reducing ‘off target’ effects.
What might be some disadvantages of the ‘reductionist approach’ to making vaccines?
On the opposite end of the spectrum, sometimes too little information is delivered. This is something that we have seen in therapeutic vaccines against cancer, in particular, and sometimes we have seen this in clinical studies of vaccines against infectious diseases. One clinical study, for example, involved treating a patient who had HIV with a peptide that was the ‘key antigen’ for his specific virus. Initially, the amount of virus that was in his blood was reduced, but when it rebounded, the researchers discovered that his virus had mutated its sequence to escape the immune pressure of the vaccine.
We think that this might also occur for vaccines against cancer, which can also vary in response to immune pressure by ‘escaping’ from a single antigen that might be included in the anti-cancer vaccine.
In response to the problem of immune escape, our approach has been to combine multiple ‘key antigens’ or even very small pieces of these key antigens, called epitopes, in a single recombinant vaccine. These epitope-based vaccines can be produced from the genomic information of a single pathogen, or all of the known sequences for a single pathogen. In the case of cancer, we can combine epitopes from different antigens. Or, for viral pathogens, we can scan the variant sequences for conserved elements and combine those into a vaccine. For example, there are hundreds of thousands of sequences for HIV, and our computer tools can find the conserved epitopes from all of those strains to put in a single vaccine – we are working on such a vaccine (two papers on the approach were published this year (Paper 1, Paper 2) that we call the “GAIA” HIV vaccine, because it could be used anywhere in the world and would work against any strain of the virus.
What are the new tools that you have been working on?
Since we believe that putting multiple epitopes into a vaccine is the best approach, we have developed a whole suite of tools that can turn genomic information into a string of epitopes that can be expressed as a vaccine. The tools are packaged together in a “workflow” management system called iVAX.
The iVAX toolkit has been tested on several different vaccines over the past 10 years with great results (at least in mice). Examples include H. pylori (the cause of gastritis and stomach cancer) and a new smallpox vaccine (we call it VennVax) (both are published). What’s exciting is that our iVAX toolkit can essentially design vaccines ‘in silico’ (on a computer chip). These vaccines can then be produced recombinantly using any number of methods (DNA, protein fusions, peptides in liposome are the approaches we have tested so far). In theory, we could design a vaccine within just hours of being provided with a pathogen’s genome.
That sounds exciting, is it really happening?
We’re currently testing that theory in collaboration with Mark Poznanksy of NIH, who obtained funding from DARPA to pull together a consortium to make “vaccines on demand”. We provide the vaccine design technology (using the iVAX toolkit) for what is now called the VaxCellerate Consortium.
If you want to be really futuristic, imagine using our tools in combination with the “3-D printers” that are all the rage now – in silico design of vaccines could, in theory, produce vaccines ‘on demand’ for a single person, tailored to their own genetic make up and whatever specific pathogens they are exposed to. I don’t think it’s too far fetched to imagine designing vaccines for personal use, that could be produced at home. It could be done, using the iVAX toolkit that we have designed.
How far has the industry come over the last decade in optimizing issues related to vaccine production, delivery and safety?
There are a number of companies that have developed great vaccine delivery vehicles, such as DNA – yes, genes that express the vaccine message, so that the vaccine actually gets made right in your own body. A great example of a vaccine company that is leading the way is Inovio. They have quite a few DNA vaccines in clinical trials, and they have an excellent safety track record. They’ve been working on optimizing the delivery of vaccines by electroporation, and have been working on making smaller and smaller versions of the electroporation delivery system. It’s really very exciting, what they’re up to! I believe that DNA vaccines are really the way to make vaccines in the future.
Other examples of “faster” vaccines that have been developed include the cell-culture based vaccines that are being developed by Novartis and Baxter. I think that these are very exciting developments but I also have concerns about the potential for host-cell proteins that might get into those vaccines. By that I mean – the proteins that are present in the cell culture medium. I’m just putting that idea out there, without knowing a lot about the processes that these very accomplished companies use to rid the final product of mammalian proteins. I know that “HCP” are a concern for biologics developers, so I can’t imagine that they won’t also be an issue for vaccine developers that use the same cell culture methods.
How will Epivax’s immunoinformatics platform continue to drive innovation to address the challenges that remain in this area?
We’ve been working on some really cool approaches to understanding immune responses using our computer tools. For example, we think that the ‘critical antigens’ of that should be put into vaccines should include proteins that are somewhat conserved with proteins that are present in our own gut micro biome. Turns out that our gut micro-biome probably educates our T cells, so the elements of pathogens that are somewhat conserved with elements of the gut micro biome could be the most effective ‘critical antigens’ to put into a vaccine. Stay tuned for more on that story! ?
An Interview with Annie De Groot, MD – Vaccine Researcher
Posted on April 3, 2013
How far has the industry come over the last decade in optimizing issues related to vaccine production, delivery and safety?
There are a number of companies that have developed great vaccine delivery vehicles, such as DNA – yes, genes that express the vaccine message, so that the vaccine actually gets made right in your own body. A great example of a vaccine company that is leading the way is Inovio. They have quite a few DNA vaccines in clinical trials, and they have an excellent safety track record. They’ve been working on optimizing the delivery of vaccines by electroporation, and have been working on making smaller and smaller versions of the electroporation delivery system. It’s really very exciting, what they’re up to! I believe that DNA vaccines are really the way to make vaccines in the future.
Other examples of “faster” vaccines that have been developed include the cell-culture based vaccines that are being developed by Novartis and Baxter. I think that these are very exciting developments but I also have concerns about the potential for host-cell proteins that might get into those vaccines. By that I mean – the proteins that are present in the cell culture medium. I’m just putting that idea out there, without knowing a lot about the processes that these very accomplished companies use to rid the final product of mammalian proteins. I know that “HCP” are a concern for biologics developers, so I can’t imagine that they won’t also be an issue for vaccine developers that use the same cell culture methods."
Very Interesting article from DAVID WEINER on his PENNVAX-B vaccine May/09/2012
http://www.iavireport.org/Blog/archive/2012/05/09/could-dna-vaccines-be-reaching-their-prime.aspx
FLU STUDY COINCIDENCE????????
Take a look who the lead investgator is on this study of The flu study at the Universty of Manatoba (canada}
Dr. Gary P. Kobinger, Professor, University of Manitoba, Originally from the Philadelphia area and went to school at the University of Pennsylvania and studied with PhD David Weiner
http://ir.inovio.com/2012-12-10-Inovios-Synthetic-Flu-Vaccine-Doubles-Rate-of-Elderly-Subjects-Displaying-Protective-Immune-Responses
http://www.nml-lnm.gc.ca/zsp-zps/VDI-CVI-eng.htm
No the interesting part the purchaser of 9,000,000 shares of stock and 4,500,000 options in INOVIOS OFFERING is Mr. Martin Kobinger Also
Martin Kobinger is associated with Heights Capital Management, Inc. with the role of President. and is located in San Francisco, CA.
Source:
California Secretary of State last refreshed 3/13/2013 ( ALSO FROM THE PHILADELPHIA AREA)
http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/profile/person?personId=485625586&targetid=profile
http://www.investorscopes.com/HEIGHTS-CAPITAL-MANAGEMENT-INC/1081698.aspx which is Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/profile/company?companyId=37175775&targetid=profile
THESE GUYS ARE BOTH FROM PHILADELPHIA AREA AND ARE VERY CLOSE IN AGE
IS THIS JUST A COINCIDENCE I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!!!!
Everwhereman,what a great Interview it certainly clears things up for me, Thankyou for your efforts to help us understand this company, PhD JOSEPH KIM is truly a Genius progressing this far in 15 years with so little money, and to think with there 2and generation vaccines and there 2and generation delivery system were only months a way from conclusive results, its been a long haul for you also (12 years) you've indicated your group has alot of money invested and what your doing to educate us is appreciated
Thankyou Everywhereman, it gets a little confussing at times with ADVISYS being a private company, I've assumed that KIM and WEINER understood from early on they needed a delivery system to be successful and ADVISYS had the delivery system in place if you read the article I asked you to youd see its pretty clear that advisys had the delivery system and plasmid manufacturing base although your right for animals but it seems that everthing that VGX did in accuiring a delivery system involved expirements with animals first before humans, anyway once again I want to know what VGX needed with Gentronics when apparently they already had Cellectra tm in house, It seems to me that after Gentronics aquired INOVIO A/S it became a priority to VGX, I believe that patents owned by Gentronics because of that Merger were Needed to succeed with CELLECTRA tm do you have any knowledge of this? anyway I thank you for all your posts and Videos, I've never posted any of my thoughts before today but I'm involved with a group of investors that control over 1,000,000 shares of stock and were trying to figure this out and of course feel that with the next generation of ELECTROPORATION Devices from INOVIO (CELLECTRA tm) will lead to the success were all hoping for and the next 3 quarters will define wheather were correct
Everyway man are you positive Joseph Kim and David Weiner did'nt co-found ADVISYS? here are more links to support they did http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=9081506&privcapId=9070406&previousCapId=34553&previousTitle=Echo%20Therapeutics,%20Inc and http://www.insideview.com/directory/advisys-inc
http://www.hallway.com/management/gene-j-kim-reviews
WHAT AM I MISSING HERE?
Hi Everywhereman thank you for your reply, you do realize that ADVISYS was a startup company out of Baylor University and a private company? I found a link that indicates it was founded by Joseph Kim and co founded by David Weiner http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=2750605 I also see it has Listed Mr. Young K. Park
as Vice President and General Counsel of course you know him as the CEO of VGXII in korea http://www.vgxi.com/eng/ But what I'm really interested in Knowing is the following, will you please go to this chapter (KEY COMPANIES AND THEIR PRODUCTS 8.5) in the following link and read the 4 pages that explains ADVISYs and VGX http://books.google.com/books?id=CJHIlrsQDgEC&pg=PT288&lpg=PT288&dq=Cellectra+tm+Inovio&source=bl&ots=fzTwCmGE39&sig=M4dYQFB_T_xhjT7c-Xy2ssdgbYg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_1pYUdHLEoPm9ATBk4D4Bw&sqi=2&ved=0CHoQ6AEwCQ and explain to me how advanced VGX was with CELLECTRA TM at that time? and If they where that advanced with a Electroportaion delivery system Why did they Need Gentronics? the time of the merger of ADVISYS by VGX was in 2007, Ive been told by Inovio that GENTRONICS and VGX had interaction as early as 2006 and I'd Like to find out that as Gentronics merged with Inovio A/S http://ir.inovio.com/index.php?s=43&item=91 in 2005, what was the reason of VGX interest? was it because of this merger between gentronics with INOVIO A/S that they now had the patients that VGX needed for their CELLECTRA Tm product to finally have the delivery system that we all hope for?
you might like to read this article on Plasmid Biopharmaceuticals (Basics, applications, Delivery Systems, and you'll see the importance of Phd.JOSEPH KIM and Phd.DAVID WEINER Decission to create ADVISYS which of course 17 years later is INOVIO PHAMACEUTICAL with a delivery system that could change the world
http://books.google.com/books?id=CJHIlrsQDgEC&pg=PT288&lpg=PT288&dq=Cellectra+tm+Inovio&source=bl&ots=fzTwCmGE39&sig=M4dYQFB_T_xhjT7c-Xy2ssdgbYg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_1pYUdHLEoPm9ATBk4D4Bw&sqi=2&ved=0CHoQ6AEwCQ
I understand, Its truly amazing the patient portfollio on Electroporation that INOVIO PHARMA has developed from all their acquisitions like Ive stated before ADVISYS, VGX, GENTROICS, INOVIO A/S which to me has been the KEY accusition "with their European patient library", and now the Patients that INOVIO PHARMA are Developing,It sure seems to me That Dr.Kim has cornered the market on ELECTROPORATION and without a delivery system DNA vaccines are Impossible
Hi, I'm very thankful that your putting this together and I'm wondering if your taking this back to the initial private company founded By Dr.Joseph kim and Dr david Weiner in 1997 which was ADVISAYS, http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=2750605 a start up privatly owned bio tech firm thru Baylor University, from my research its the beginning of the quest of a delivery system now available thru INOVIO PHARMA, ADVISYS was the Incubator for the development of the Plasmid production facility located at woodlands texas and the first exposure that Kim and WEINER had in devoloping there contributions to Electroporation thru the patients with a system called (ELECTROKINETICS) this company merged with VGX with this quote from DR.KIM “We are very excited to bring into our fold ADViSYS’ technologies and recognized leaders in the field of DNA manufacturing and delivery”, http://www.vgxah.com/PR_022607.html to follow the trail from Advisys to VGX to Gentronics and the merger with Inovio A/S and then the merger of Gentronics/Inovio Bio and VGX to form Inovio Pharmaceuticals is a testament to Joseph Kims Genuis, its taken 17/18 years for this to play out and for KIM and WEINER to finally have the delivery system "CELLECTRA ELECTROPORATION" that could change the world
ANOTHER GREAT ARTICLE ON INO
http://www.genengnews.com/gen-articles/tackling-transfection-tasks/4654/?page=1
HOW LONG WILL THIS STOCK BE UNDER 1 dollara share, I dont think very much longer, with Marxe out of the picture this stock is gonna fly past 1.00 a share hopefully this month
GREAT ARTICLE ON INO
http://www.thelifesciencesreport.com/pub/na/14900
great video presentation at a noble finacial seminar reposted from yahoo DR KIM STATES IN THE LAST SENTENCE (THEY DONT HAVE AN UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF SHARES) REFERING TO MARXE AUSTINS SABOTAGE OF ARE STOCK, THEY ONLY HAVE 9,700,000 SHARES REMAINING AND HAVEN'T SOLD FOR OVER 5 MONTHS MAYBE ITS TRULY OVER, ITS TIME TO STEP UP AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE PRICES http://noble.mediasite.com/mediasite/Pla... CAN ANYONE ELSE SUPPLY POSSITIVE FEEDBACK ON THIS COMPANY? NOT ALL THIS CRAP I'VE BEEN READING? JUST THINK GREAT NEWS COULD BE ALOT CLOSER THEN ANYONE IMAGINES HINT HINT
repost from from yahoo MERCK EMPLOYEES
YOUR SO RIGHT, BUT THERES SO MUCH MORE THAN JUST THAT http://anewmerckreviewed.wordpress.com/2... DOE'S ANYONE REALIZE THAT THE SHARES (11,302,150) THAT MARXE AUSTIN SOLD FROM 2/4/11 THRU 12/13/2011 WASN'T INSIDER TRADING IN MY ESTIMATION!!!! JUST SHARE REALLOCATION, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, IT'S TRULY TO BAD IT DROVE THE STOCK SO LOW .38 BUT WATCH WHAT ITS ABOUT TO DO SOON, DOES EVERYONE REALIZE ARE CEO HAS PURCHASED 382,267 SHARES OF STOCK AT A COST OF $236,000 OR .62 OVER THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME THATS HALF HIS SALARY!!!! http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/... MARXE AUSTIN IS A INVESTMENT BANKER THAT HAS $741,186,000 IN ASSETS WITH 394 COMPANIES AND CREATES NEW POSITIONS EVERY MONTH AND DECREASE'S POSITIONS EVERY MONTH AND INOVIO GOT CAUGHT IN THIS CYCLE IN MY ESTIMATION CHECK THIS OUT http://www.j3sg.com/Reports/Stock-Inside... I HOPE I PASTED THESE LINKS CORRECTLY ANYWAY PLEASE GIVE YOUR FEEDBACK
2000 acres under cultivation with the ability to supply 10,000 members [after nearly three years, the actual adoption of a safety standard Zhongzhi operations, as well as monitoring the whole process of growing production, has been established to meet safety standards for nearly 2,000 acres of vegetable planting base, first base is located in planting: Shandong Weifang, Zhangjiakou, Hebei, Xinjiang Aksu, Korla, Xinjiang and other places, security, agricultural productivity about 500 tons / month, at this stage can ensure the supply of about 10,000 members needs.