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.
radean2000, I have read hwan's posts and I suspect that Hwan has a good command of the English language! If you read Hwan's posts, you may come to the same conclusion. It just appears that the later posts seem to digress more than the earlier posts!
IVRT
hwan this board is not for disruptive idle chatter! Please correct your human mistakes before you post! Thanks for your attention to this matter!
IVRT
Long_haul007, you are beginning to irritate the board! If you cannot post meaning dialog, it would be better that you post nothing at all. I believe that you are trying to disrupt this board. If that be the case, we have collected all of your posts and are waiting for the balance to tip against you. You can be banned from the board for disruption and I believe that is what you want! If you cannot play by the rules, the rules will ultimately play you!
IVRT
What does CMIH have to do with DNAP? This clutters up the board! Please use the private message function for this purpose!
PLEASE!
IVRT
Spam - a message that is being posted promoting other sites, stock-related or not, that has no use in the discussion (for example, if your board is about Ford Motors, a link promoting amazing returns running a home-based business is worthless to the discussion).
spook, I do not disagree with the loss, but we are all aware as you for sometime, that DNAP is a Speculative venture in the development phase. Consequently, DNAP does not have a cash flow positive environment at this point in time. What pray tell are you trying to get at? Research and development costs cash, and the last time I looked people did not work for free in corporate America. Executives today corner some hefty salaries, good or bad, why should DNAP be any different? It is quite possible that the 7 players at DNAP are making below industry averages. Certainly, some are not going to cash in their stock options and awards tomorrow due to restrictions.
Debt goes hand in hand with R & D.
IVRT
'spook' you have raised some good concerns! I think your questions should be directed at dnap as well. I am interested in any responses you may get from DNAP, if you email them, concerning these questions.
IVRT
OT, Arch, I am looking forward to your pics! I have seen some of your pics at your photo album site. Is the Victorian home (winter setting, I believe) your house?
IVRT
Long_haul007 it would be wise of you to email IHUB support, for help on this subject!
IVRT
Please do not bring your petty differences that you have with posters, from other stock board to this board. This is considered disruption! You have a private message function for that purpose, and by all means use it til you turn blue! Please do not assume that, just because a poster's name on this board is the same as one on RB for example, that they are one in the same. Please respect the posters on this board; I do not think they want to waste their time reading this type of posting.
Thanks!
IVRT
Here's a link to an old PR from Waggoner. It would be interesting to know what DNAP had to say with regard to the following: ...technologies underlying predictive pharmacogenomics will yield drugs that are more compatible with an individual patient’s ability to metabolize medicine and less likely to produce adverse side effects...
Looks like Tony learned something from this discussion, about drugs and his company. Is DNAP merging or partnering in the near future? It takes a lot of $$$$$$$$$ for NDA and trials from phase I thru after market testing. I am very interested in this new direction DNAP is embarking on!
http://www.chireports.com/content/reports/predictive_medicine.asp
Please respect the board and not use cap locks to post entire messages! There is no need to be flamboyant.
hwan, give them a call, it is your idea and you should run with it. Let us know what you find!
IVRT
Please use the private message function available to you for personal issues you have with other posters.
Please respect other board members in this regard!
Thanks!!!!!
IVRT
Everyone please read this post: What Messages can be Deleted on this board?
I have supplied a link too!
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/complex_terms.asp
...Moderators of stock-specific boards are allowed to immediately remove any post for Admin review that falls into the following categories: Duplicate, Personal Attack, Spam. Each hidden/removed post is reviewed by Admin and either left removed or restored...
This is general information and I would like to let everyone know that the DNAP board does not allow for disruptive posters. It is not our intent to delete posts on the board as long as they follow Ihub's tos for stock boards. If a poster continues to disrupt the board, their posts will be forwarded to Ihub for review! None of us wants another RB chaotic board!!!!
IVRT
Gandolf3, you asked a great question! Why don't you email DNAP and ask them for an answer? I am sure they could give a reply a lot better than us! Then you could post their answer here and we can all read it! Here is their email contact address:
admin@dnaprint.com
IVRT
Here's an article on ACE and ARB!
There are angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors drugs and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB).
Cardiovascular Disorders Ask The Expert
Rationale for Combining ACE Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers
Posted 10/23/2002
from Medscape Primary Care
Question
What is the rationale behind combining angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs)?
Stephen George, MD
Response
from Ken Grauer, MD, 10/23/2002
At first glance, one might question the concept of using the combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB in the same patient. Both classes of drugs work to inhibit the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone (RAA) system. Combined use would therefore seem redundant.
In actuality, the mechanism of action of ACE inhibitors and ARBs is not exactly the same. Although it is true that the end result of each agent is angiotensin-II inhibition, the site of action of ARBs is more distal than that of ACE inhibitors. ACE inhibitors block the action of the ACE. As a result, angiotensin-I is no longer converted to angiotensin-II. ACE is also responsible for breakdown of bradykinin, which is an inflammatory mediator and vasodilator. ACE inhibition therefore leads to accumulation of bradykinin, which serves to augment the amount of vasodilatation produced by ACE-inhibitor drugs. Just how potent the vasodilatory effect produced by bradykinin will be in any given patient is uncertain. Bradykinin is also important because it may be responsible for the adverse effects of cough and angioedema that occur with ACE inhibitors, but which are rare with ARBs.
In contrast to ACE inhibitors, ARBs do not affect ACE, and therefore do not result in bradykinin accumulation. Instead, ARB drugs produce a more distal (end-receptor blockade) effect that inhibits angiotensin-II. Because enzyme systems other than ACE are involved in angiotensin production, this more distal effect of ARB drugs may actually produce a greater overall angiotensin-II inhibitory effect than ACE inhibitors. However the effect of bradykinin on various vascular beds may counteract the somewhat lesser overall inhibition of angiotensin-II, so that the clinical potency of ACE inhibitors and ARBs for blood pressure reduction is comparable in most studies.
Use of ACE inhibitors is usually preferred initially for treatment of heart failure if there are no contraindications, because of the much greater body of supportive literature on the use of this class of drugs compared with the ARBs. However, when bothersome cough or other idiosyncratic reaction prevents use of ACE inhibitors, substitution of an ARB is usually recommended.
With this background, I offer the following rationale for considering use of both an ACE inhibitor and ARB in the same patient: an augmented clinical effect might be seen in selected patients because the mechanism of action of these 2 classes of drugs, while similar, is not identical. Clinically, combined use is most often contemplated in the treatment of heart failure. Support for this concept was seen in the Val-HeFT Trial, in which the addition of an ARB to either an ACE inhibitor or a beta-blocker had a beneficial effect on morbidity and mortality.[1,2] However, post-hoc analysis of this trial failed to show additional benefit from use of an ARB if both an ACE inhibitor and a beta-blocker were already being used. That stated, it should be remembered that results from evidence-based trials represent statistical likelihood of benefit of a drug (ie, "average effect") in a large population, but does not rule out potential for benefit in an individual patient. In view of Val-HeFT results, however, it is likely that if a patient with chronic heart failure is already on full doses of an ACE inhibitor and a beta-blocker, addition of an ARB will probably not exert a large beneficial effect. However, given our direction as clinicians to individualize patient care in the practice of the "art" of medicine, it is clearly reasonable to consider adding an ARB to the regimen of an individual with heart failure who is already taking an ACE inhibitor and beta-blocker (as well as an optimal diuretic dose and other standard therapy) if he has not optimally responded to previous treatment. This is especially relevant if persistent hypertension remains problematic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Cohn JN. Cardiology. Improving outcomes in congestive heart failure: Val-HeFT. Valsartan in Heart Failure Trial. 1999;91(suppl 1):19-22.
Cohn JN, Tognoni G, for the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial Investigators. A randomized trial of the angiotensin-receptor blocker valsartan in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1667-1675.
About the Panel Members
Ken Grauer, MD, Professor of Community Health and Family Medicine and Assistant Director, Family Practice Residency Program, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Medscape Primary Care 4(2), 2002. © 2002 Medscape
Theo, DougS and I are the moderators for this board! John has stepped down to concentrate on the other boards that he moderates for here at Ihub. If you have any concerns about posts on "THIS BOARD," please private message one of us! Have a good day and happy trading to you!
IVRT
I am finally glad to see you folks posting here. It has been lonely over here, but the lack of BS from RB has made the months refreshing here. I want to welcome you to the DNAP board. We can delete many messages such as spam and abusive language and etc.
If you have issues with fellow posters here, please use the private reply button amongst yourselves or email sysop for help. Over the last year or two we have had minimal problems with spam and wholesale idiotic posters.
Glad to see some of the old DNAP posters here as well as new ones too!
IVRT
Looks great John :)! eom
Jmhollen is the new DNAP board assistant! Not a big thing, but I wanted to let everyone know. I have not heard from cerealman in along time, and removed him accordingly!
Have a good day all!
IVRT
The Revolution in Forensic Genomic Starts Now
DETERMINE RACE PROPORTIONS FROM CRIME SCENE DNA
- The Revolution in Forensic Genomic Starts Now -
DNAPrint genomics, Inc. has applied the most recent advancements in human genomic technology for the deciphering of an individual's race. We are proud to introduce to the forensic community DNA WITNESS 2.0, a genetic test for the deduction of the heritable component of race, called Biogeographical Ancestry (BGA). This test is the first of its kind, resulting from three (3) years of genomic research, and is the beginning of a revolution in criminal investigations. This test provides not only the majority population affiliation (i.e. Indo European, Sub-Saharan African, East Asian or Native American), but the admixture, as well (i.e. 82% East Asian and 18% Indo-European mix).
This new test provides important Forensic Anthropological information relevant for a wide variety of investigative situations. When biological evidence is gathered, an investigative team can use DNA WITNESS 2.0 to construct a partial physical profile from the DNA and in many cases learn details about the donor's appearance, essentially permitting a partial reconstruction of their driver's license photo. How many times have you wished an unknown suspect left his driver's license at the scene - even if the unique identifiers were smudged?
Recognizing the need for genomics-based physical profiling tools, DNAPrint genomics is the first company to apply human genome power for the precise estimation of Biogeographical percentages from DNA.
Because physical profiling from DNA will effectively offer an objective "eyewitness" for each crime, where biological evidence has been left, the implications for saving investigative dollars and maximizing the efficiency of our criminal justice system are profound. STR identity tests form the cornerstone of forensic DNA analysis, but they are not useful for the assumption of race or any other physical traits, because the STR markers were not selected for the ability to do so. Other non-DNA based investigative work tends to rely on less scientifically robust methodology. For example, "eyewitnesses":
" Are not always reliable, are subjective and sometimes misleading. Most of the felons released from death row, based on DNA testing, were convicted based on faulty eyewitness testimony.
" Are not available for each crime.
Until now, no scientific method has been available to help investigators learn what a DNA donor looks like. DNAPrint's DNA WITNESS 2.0 product represents the first wave of a genomics revolution that is afoot in forensics science. We are applying the test to actual casework and we've performed testing for a number of high profile murder/rape cases, where DNA was left at the crime scene.
DNA WITNESS 2.0 could provide additional detail to current cases or cold cases could be re-visited. The results indicating to detectives what population groups to include or exclude in their investigation. The goal of the product is simple, help you focus your investigation and identify from whom a forensic sample was derived. Effectively, what we have done is harness our increasing knowledge of human genomics to help you get the job done. Wouldn't you like to have a DNA eyewitness for your most important cases?
We would be pleased to provide you a CD-ROM of the validation experiments, which was performed for this test on over 2,000 DNA samples.
Please contact us to discuss the possibility of using DNA WITNESS 2.0 on your cold, current, or next case.
Zach Gaskin
Technical Director, Forensic Genomics
941-366-3400
zgaskin@dnaprint.com
Copyright DNAPrint genomics © 2000
900 Cocoanut Ave.
Sarasota, FL 34236
(941) 366-3400
Fax # (941) 952-9770
GPXME moving, up 0.08 on news! http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=34280683
DNAPrint Launches Ancestry 2.0 Forensic Profiling Service and Immediately Impacts Several Criminal Investigations
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/news.jsp?url=fis_story.asp%3Ftextpath%3DCOMTEX%5Cpr%5C2003%5C05%5C02...
DNAPrint genomics Appoints Richard Gabriel as President and CEO
http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33782252
Happy New Year 2003!!!!!!!!!!
DNAPRINT GENOMICS INC 0001127354 10QSB
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001070876%252D02...
Phil Brooks as the Company's first marketing director.
DNAPrint Enters Into Development Site Agreement With Nanogen to Develop DNA Chip Based Tests
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/news.jsp?url=fis_story.asp%3Ftextpath%3DCOMTEX%5Cbw%5C2002%5C10%5C29...
DNAPrint Launches ANCESTRYbyDNA 2.0 - World's First Recreational Genomics Testing Service
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/news.jsp?url=fis_story.asp%3Ftextpath%3DCOMTEX%5Cbw%5C2002%5C09%5C19...
The new DNAP newsletter:
Dear Shareholders,
I am happy to send you our second company newsletter. First, let me say that I consider DNAPrint’s scientific achievements thus far to be a great success. Rest assured, however, that our efforts are just beginning. We have written, applied and patented some of the most algorithmically complex and advanced genomics data analysis programs on the planet. In one year, these algorithms have helped us solve genetic problems (such as variable human iris color) that had perplexed geneticists for decades. I believe that your investment has helped create a formidable player in the genomics based testing market.
The Company has seen many developments since our last newsletter. We have changed the composition of our Board, announced several new scientific partners, and announced the discovery of three new forensics classifiers and their imminent product launches. We have also achieved a significant equipment upgrade that reduced our overhead and accelerated our throughput - at no cost to us. Further, we announced our foray into commercial genotyping, which we expect will help establish a revenue base upon which to grow. I will discuss some of these items one by one:
RETINOME - We have announced our intention to have either a beta trial or a partnership with a large company in place by the end of the year. This is an important part of our business strategy you should understand. We would prefer to partner our products with capable partners so we can devote ourselves to discovery and grow our revenue base more rapidly. However, if we cannot obtain satisfactory terms from a prospective partner, we will market a given test ourselves. This would provide us more profit from each test, but would increase product development costs and reduce the number of tests we could develop. We are currently in discussions with four large corporations to help us commercialize this test.
On a different note, my recent Washington D.C. presentation for RETINOME was very well received. In fact, I sensed that people are shocked that such a small company could do what we have done. Realize that RETINOME is the first complex genetics classifier to be presented in the post human genome age. Larger companies with more resources have yet to announce such a development - some have announced SNPs or haplotype associations, but we are the first to present a complex genetics classifier that performs well upon blind challenge. This bodes very well for our ability to make drug classifiers since most of these will also be complex! As we have always maintained, the key is our math.
OVANOME - Earlier this year, our University of Miami collaborators and I presented the results of our Ovarian Cancer pharmacogenomics study at the Society of Gynecological Oncology Miami and at BIOIT Boston. Our study is unique because we are focused on the variable response to firstline treatment (a pharmacokinetic problem, not a tumor genetics problem). To my knowledge, we are the only company with successful results there. We have applied for an NIH grant to fund a prospective trial at Miami, the data from which will go into an FDA application so that we could be approved to sell the kits. Until this process is complete, we will offer Taxol genotyping services (preferably through a licensee), which are not subject to FDA regulation. This brings up a second point that you should understand about our drug classifier strategy (as opposed to our forensics test strategy). For each kit we produce, there will be a service phase and a supply phase. Making an FDA approved kit (i.e., the supply phase) is more profitable, but it takes time to get kits approved by the FDA. So, until we receive FDA approval for our drug classification kits, we will perform services using our kits ourselves (i.e., the service phase). Companies like Myriad Genetics have had great success performing genetics testing services. In the case of the Taxol classifier, our licensees and affiliates will begin performing classifications for prospective Taxol patients at the University of Miami while we compile the FDA application. We will add future customer sites based on customer satisfaction at the primary sites, and we hope that word of mouth will travel fast since peoples’ lives are at stake. We believe that this service/supply commercialization model will help us maximize return on investment.
OTHER TESTS - We have finished both the genotyping and the computational screening for Lipitor and Zocor, and we have finished the genotyping but not the computational screening for about 15 other drugs we have good sample sizes for. As we complete these projects, we will disclose the results within a formal, peer-reviewed setting such as a professional meeting or in the scientific literature.
SNPs - From a screen of thousands of SNPs, we have settled on a panel of 346 SNPs in about 50 xenobiotic metabolism genes for our pharmacogenomics screening. These SNPs have good characteristics (minor allele frequencies) for the sample sizes we employ - which mean they are of potentially good statistical use. Validated SNP panels like this one, of potential statistical value, are not easy to find and impossible to purchase - the chip-based sets available commercially typically apply onlyto a few cytochrome P450s, but our set covers 50 genes. We are quite proud of this panel.
ACADEMIC DEALS - We have inked new deals with the New York University and Penn State University, and added a world-renowned geneticist to our Scientific Advisory Board. These agreements supplement our existing agreement with the University of Miami. The fact that some of the nation’s leading medical universities want to work with DNAPrint speaks highly of our science.
CORPORATE - Earlier in the year, we changed the composition of our board of directors. Our new board members are providing top-notch advice and are prospecting for new deals and corporate investors. To help with this, we have consulted with professionals to greatly simplify and update our business/marketing plan. Our existing $2M funding source for the next year or so has so far been quite reliable (about $650,000 of it has so far been funded). I think it reflects favorably on our company that friends, officers and directors prefer to fund it rather than offer the opportunity to an outside venture group. We are currently evaluating and planning for our research needs after the existing funding term, and we will continue discussing this topic in the upcoming months.
OTHER ITEMS - So far, we have filed for a total of 8 patents - 5 mathematical methods/software patents and 3 classifier patents. Four of these have been converted to date to regular utility patent applications, the other four are to be converted within the year. We add data to each provisional over the course of time to make it as strong as possible before converting it. The patent process is an ongoing process, of course, as they naturally flow from our work here. The patents filed here at DNAPrint are my life's greatest scientific achievements, by far. Mostly because of the challenging level on which the work has been performed, I find them more rewarding than others I have been involved with in the past. We have written 2 scientific manuscripts and are writing a third. For products that may be partnered, the publication dates are set through the process of negotiation (i.e. we are not a University and we do not rush to publish everything we have as soon as we have it.). We have 4 grant applications pending at present and 2 more in preparation.
While we cannot control the financial markets or the financial performance of our partners, we can control the quality of work we do. We believe our share price will ultimately reflect this quality, in addition to the quality of our business decisions. Keep in mind, however, that our aim is to build a company for the long term. I know most of you are long-term investors, and it is with your interests in mind that we shape every decision made here. I think we have performed well to date and I hope you agree.
Until the next newsletter then,
Respectfully,
Tony
Next DNAP conference: June 24-28, 2002 in Washington D.C., and at the National Managed Health Care Congress (NMHCC) "Disease Management Congress" to be held September 16-20 in Chicago, IL.
http://www.dnaprint.com/pr_retinome.html
You can access the ABC DNAP videos from DNAP's web page now. http://www.dnaprint.com./
Capitalizing on the next cholesterol blockbuster drugs
Interesting read...
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/insight/editorial.gsp?id=65203
Sarasota company buys DNA samples
http://www.heraldtribune.com/frontpage/story.cfm?ID=67969
DNAPRINT GENOMICS INC 10KSB
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/filings.jsp?symbol=DNAP
Trading stocks is the game!!! DNAP is my favorite stock to trade!!!
Discovery may help to fight ovarian cancer
http://www.heraldtribune.com/business/d-index.cfm
Focused Plenary Session on Ovarian Cancer
http://www.sgo.org/meetings/33annual/abstracts/abstract.asp?abstractid=21
Determination of a Candidate Gene in Predicting In-Vivo Ovarian Cancer Response to Combination Therapy with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel
Ramin Mirhashemi*, J Fernando Arena, Tony Frudakis, Nicholas Lambrou, Jane Arboleda, Marsha Hunt, Hervy E Averette, Manuel A Penalver. Univ of Miami, Sch of Medicine, Miami, FL, DNAPrint Genomics, Sarrasota, FL.
Objectives: Patient response rates to primary treatment of ovarian cancer with combination of paclitaxel and the carboplatin agents is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and inter-individual variability. In an attempt to define the genetic determinants for this variability, we are conducting a pharmacogenomics study to predict response based on patient genomics.
Methods: Our approach is a systematic haplotype-based candidate gene approach, where we genotype each patient at each single nucleotide polymorphic (SNP) site for each gene known to be relevant for xenobiotic disposition, then computationally infer haplotypes, and geometrically model the data in order to identify associations between haplotypes and response. We have chosen this novel approach to objectively define an optimal pharmacogenomics solution.
Results: We have constructed SNP maps for 50 genes known to be involved in xenobiotic metabolism and/or the disposition of paclitaxel and carboplatin and have discovered an average of 30 candidate SNPs per gene, which, upon polymorphism screening, validated at a rate of about 18 SNPs per gene. Having obtained genotypes for 57 patients at each of the SNPs in several genes, preliminary results have revealed a statistically significant association (Fishers Exact p=0.00332 ± 0.00043) between haplotypes at the CYP3A4 gene and a lack of response to paclitaxel/carboplatin as measured by the CA-125 tumor marker. In particular, the GAC and GAT CYP3A4 haplotypes were only present in the non-responder group (n=22), when an absolute decrease in CA-125 was used to define responders (n=40). When a 20% decrease in CA-125 was used, a similar result was obtained (Fishers Exact p=0.016 ± 0.001); GAC was found in the non-responder group 71% of the time, and the GAT haplotype was found in the non-responder group 100% of the time.
Conclusions: SNPs in candidate genes being identified could potentially be used pre-treatment to individualize chemotherapy for patients with ovarian cancer. This in vivo assay could help classify ovarian cancer patients as potential responders or non-responders to our conventional chemotherapeutic agents.
Society of Gynecologic Oncologists
401 N. Michigan Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611
(312) 644-6610
E-mail: sgo@sba.com