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.
DNAG and NeoCodex SL.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200608/ai_n16686946
Thanks.EOM
You will know better if you go and call than me telling you. I'm saying that my statement is true. Maybe your thinking will change a little.
Yes, They picked up the phone. Call tomorrow and you`re gonna find your answers.
I had called dnaprint today. They seemed okay. :)
thx. EOM
BioServe and DNA Print are collaborating to develop a pharmacogenetic diagnostic designed to help doctors identify which ovarian cancer patients will respond best to carboplatin/Taxol-based chemotherapy.
Under an ongoing collaboration penned in 2003, BioServe provided DNA Print with clinical samples for an ovarian cancer study. According to a BioServe spokesperson, “validation is now occurring towards [developing] a PGx application,” called Ovanome, that will be launched in the first quarter of 2009.
In order to help DNA Print develop the test, BioServe used its physician network to prospectively identify patients on a particular therapy and perform follow-up interviews to determine the treatment outcome.
“This was crucial for DNA Print to identify the genetic markers that correlated to the response to a specific treatment,” the BioServe spokesperson told Pharmacogenomics Reporter this week.
DNA Print scientists have identified several SNP markers whose haploid alleles are predictive for non-response to the carboplatin/Taxol combination treatment. The company did not provide additional details on the test prior to deadline.
Separately, BioServe is helping DNA Print to gauge the response of hypertensive patients to treatment with Lipitor and other statins used to treat HT.
According to a BioServe spokesperson, the company has been involved with a number of statin studies investigating myalagia, a muscle-related adverse event, as well as other side effects.
DNA Print submitted a study to the American Association for Cancer Research this year that investigated whether common SNPs are associated with the expression of broadly grouped atorvastatin-induced muscle events. The company looked at 263 samples and 388 SNPs and found that the CYP2D6*4 allele was significantly associated with muscle events.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The adoption of personalized medicine on a large scale requires the identification of biomarkers … and the ability to pre-clinically validate those markers in human models before embarking on high-risk, high-cost clinical trials with confidence.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The frequency of the CYP2D6*4 allele was about 50 percent in atorvastatin-induced muscle patients but only 28 percent in controls, similar to that of other patient types (28.5 percent),” the abstract states. “Our results suggest that the CYP2D6*4 allele is associated with broadly related muscle events caused by at least two structurally dissimilar HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, and as such, may have implications for a better understanding of this statin-wide phenomena.”
Pharma Collaborations
BioServe's collaboration with DNA Print is one in a number of research efforts the company is undertaking with drug, biotechnology, and diagnostic companies. BioServe said that in the second half of 2007 it signed 211 agreements with several biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, including Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, and Genentech, as well as research organizations, including the Broad Institute, the National Cancer Institute, Baylor University, and Health Canada.
According to the BioServe spokesperson, the company currently works with 28 of the 30 large pharma companies with more than $3 billion in revenue or with R&D expenditure of $500 million or more. Its collaborations with pharmas have been bolstered by its acquisition of Genomics Collaborative in May 2007. Since the acquisition, BioServe has acquired 76 new customers, the company reported.
“The adoption of personalized medicine on a large scale requires the identification of biomarkers … and the ability to pre-clinically validate those markers in human models before embarking on high-risk, high-cost clinical trials with confidence,” the BioServe spokesperson explained.
This is where BioServe's platform — which includes CLIA-certified genomic and molecular processing services and a global biobank of 1.5 million human tissue, DNA, blood, and serum samples from 140,000 patients — helps customers identify, validate, and process biomarkers for drug and diagnostic development.
In 2008, the company plans to introduce several bio-sample and processing products “to increase the utility and application of human bio-samples for a larger portion of the research and development community,” BioServe said in a statement.
I`m counting on this.
BioServe, DNA Print to Develop Ovarian
Cancer Dx to ID Best Chemo Responders
[March 12, 2008]
http://www.pgxreporter.com/issues/6_11/features/145627-1.html
Stocks on the SHO list are typically depressed. Stocks recently removed from the list have a better chance of recovering and increasing in value.
I don`t think so, party`s not over yet.
The show goes on.
and...
I never see them on SHO list in 2008.
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=RegSHOThreshold
Three days in the row they haven`t filled full my order.
Finally today - all of them the satlled on
5/14 price 0.0005 vol xxxxxx partiall
5/15 price 0.0005 vol 10090 partiall
5/16 price 0.0006 vol xxxxxx partiall at price 0.0005
and final xxxxxx at price 0.0006
I hope so. EOM
DNAG off SHO list EOM
I`m thinking same way. EOM
As long I concern they not going out of biznes so I`m also in a game.
I`ve seen 800% raises one day, so ... anything may happen in DNAG world.
They have to do something soon, they have no choice.
I have sent e-mail 3 weeks ago. No response.
Tanking share price has to do also with buyers. They try to buy at bid price. MM is droping the price to fill the order and we going down. Once MM sell for me at bid price, showing as a sale.
Thanks.EOM
Sam
Where did you get that number o/s
...current share count is 730,453,936
Does anybody remember posts of "Stockpimpady" (if that is the correct way to spell it.) from probably 2005 and his words abuot future cooperation betwen DNAP and Beckman Coulter?
StatStats, very good post. Good points. EMO
Chair law asked Dr. Bill Dalton, CEO/Executive Director of H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute to make presentation.
Dr. Dalton gave an update on M2Gen. The spin-off company is a partnership between Moffitt and Merck Industries.
Page # 6
http://usfweb2.usf.edu/board/Minutes/BOT%20minutes%20030107.pdf
stockhlder101
Then raise your limit.EMO
phone # 801-571-8844
thanks. eom
Delete as of 10/18/07
no. # 35 from your list.
MM`s plays hard ball. Specialy SBSH. EMO
agree.eom
Perhaps that explains why Eli Lilly licensed it and then returned it over five years ago.
regards,
frog
Explain this:
So what's the most likely candidate for first-ever Indian blockbuster? A tongue-twisting compound known as balaglitazone, which helps the body to produce insulin more efficiently, and may be used to treat diabetes. It takes the partnership between India and the West a step further than a simple alliance between two companies. First developed by an Indian company called Dr. Reddy's (which got the idea from a Japanese firm), it was then licensed out to Denmark's Novo Nordisk, a big pharmaceutical specializing in insulin. After a couple of failed efforts, Novo lost patience, and the patent went back to Dr. Reddy's. The Indian firm then picked up where the Danes left off, and is now tag-teaming with another European firm to bring the drug to market. It is already in Phase III trials, the final large-scale test on humans that is one of the last hurdles before public sale.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17303201/site/newsweek/
"I do think a nice rise is coming in September!"
No guestion about it.
By the way, my buys are showing up as sells..what's new? Still games being played.
Nothing new. Happens to me few times.
0.23 EOM
Death of the blockbuster?
It would seem, then, that one of the predictions of personalized medicine is the death of the blockbuster model. Ironically, in an era of personalized medicine, one would think that drug companies would successively decrease the range of indications and patient populations for their drugs. The blockbuster model, however, demands the opposite. The two trends are incompatible and, quite frankly, the whole drug industry model of the future is going to be determined by how this drama plays out.
So what is to be done? This is where technology convergence comes into play. You can read it for yourself but Sen. Obama's (S. 3822) bill actually mandates technology convergence between pharmaceuticals and diagnostics. Basically, among the bill's many provisions, it is stated that the FDA may:
“require the sponsor of a drug or biological product (e.g. a drug company) to (1) codevelop a companion diagnostic test, after filing an investigational new drug application or a new drug application to address significant safety concerns of the drug or biological product [and] (2) to develop a companion diagnostic test if phase IV data demonstrate significant safety or effectiveness concerns with use of the drug or biological product …”
Whether or not this bill passes, technology convergence between pharmaceuticals and diagnostics (also termed theranostics) is here to stay. How drug companies will embrace that trend will unfold over the coming year or two.
http://wistechnology.com/article.php?id=3855
2006 Shareholders Meeting
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=11711499
Funding opportunities available to DNAG due to all the latest great deals that Richard has been able to bring to DNAG:
1) We already own DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals because we own DNAG; that is the definition of “wholly owned subsidiary.” You don't need to hold shares in it. The business plan for DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals will be finished in July (from the meeting today). They are looking at various alternatives of raising capital with it. For example (my example not theirs), if they sell, say, 50% of it through an IPO for, say, $40 million. The assets on the books could be $40 million cash plus $40 million for the half still owned. You now own shares in DNAG that suddenly have $80 million in value from only one of its three wholly owned subsidiaries. There are many other alternatives but some will be dependent on Sarbanes Oxley considerations.
2) We already own Ellipsis as a Canadian subsidiary. It is established, has a patent, and has a well connected and respected COO. The business plan for it is being developed (from the meeting today). There are other good financing options in Canada available to this Canadian subsidiary. Work out a similar scenario for yourself.
3) We already own 18% of Biofrontera which will soon be having an IPO. Our 455,000 shares of Biofrontera at, say, 18 -20 euros (hypothesized by Richard) each will be valued at $10 to $11 million. That will immediately be an asset on our balance sheet. After the price stabilizes (6months?), it can be used as collateral for a loan (say 50% of the value) or some could be sold for cash.
Per Richard today: “No more reverse splits.”
Get in or get out. If you need immediate satisfaction, this company is not for you. If you want to buy for 2 cents what may well be $20 some day (3 years or 5 years) you might take the risk. I’m holding my shares and adding once in a while.
Paul
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=11718709
A few observations on the Shareholders Meeting:
1. The name of the new CFO is Karen Surplus not Susan Surplus.
2. DNAG now has 27 employees working in four locations:Sarasota, Canada, Colorado and California.
3. With the acquisition of Ellipsis they have increased their genotyping capacity. Ellipsis contributed $300,000 of revenues in the first quarter, essentially paying for the $300,000 of stock value that the acquisition cost. Revenues from Ellipsis will not be as great in the second quarter but suggestions were that it will pick up from here on out. Apparently with the acquisition of Ellipsis they acquired a patent concerning Crohn's disease and will be developing a diagnostic test for this.
4. In the context of Richard's discussion of ongoing efforts to find better funding vehicles, an overhead was thrown up showing DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals and Ellipsis as 100% wholly owned subsidiaries. One of the options mentioned which I have seen in previous situations is to IPO these subsidiaries. Given that DNAPrint would always want clear control of these subsidiaries I would not expect them to dilute there control down to 51% but think they would only sell off 20-30% of the company, thereby retaining 70 to 80% owenership. Gabriel indicated that part of the reason for spitting out DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals was to allow the markets to have a clear understanding/focus on what the company does versus it being confused by consumer products and forensics. I asked Hector Gomez if they considered Ellipsis as an IPO candidate and he said "Yes". Let's remember, however, that this may not be a near term strategy because before you do an IPO you have to have something to sell to the markets.
5. Hector discussed the old and new models for drug discovery and development. Under the old model, companies would start with over 5000 compounds, work 10 to 12 years, spend 1.2 billion dollars and get 1 drug approved. With the new model that DNAG is developing that incoporates pharmacogenomics and computational biology you can test and predict the dosing levels, the prescription benefit to the patient goes from 30% to 100% efficacy, the trial size drops from 4000 to 1000, and the time frame drops from 10-12 years to 3-5 years. When I asked him to estimate the cost of developing super EPO he said $40 million. In discussing Super EPO he indicated that the dosage would essentially be cut in half and the efficacy would last 24 hours versus the current 4 hours. Using their computational biology system they were able to catch and correct an important error I believe in the chemical makeup of the molecule.
6. In discussing drug development they provided some data on three of the projects at Moffitt. They gave a model of four phases: Discovery, 1st validation, clinical trials, FDA approval. These three projects two of which are the breast cancer and nausea and vomiting projects are still only in the discovery phase. Statinome of the other projects is the farthest along having concluded the 1st validation phase. Tony said that the next most important thing to look for with Statinome is a peer reviewed article on their results. He implied that this will be coming soon. I believe that Ovanome is in the middle of the 1st validation phase. He indicated that the DNA samples that they got from Saracare were only positive responders. Other sources of DNA for Ovanome want to own most of DNAPrint in exchange for their DNA samples.
7. Biofrontera. Because Richard and Hector are on the board, they are "verboten" from speaking about it. They did indicate that joint ventures and partnership with Biofrontera were on hold because of the IPO. Once the IPO is done, the strong implication was that they will be able to announce joint ventures on two products for ocular and nasal, that may already be in clincial trials. By the way, all the overheads used at the meeting will be on the website within 48 hours of the meeting so everyone can confirm some of this information by checking the overheads from the presentation on the website. Richard also discussed the fact that the first acquistion of Biof did not go through because of resistance from some German venture capital firms, this resulted in a battle, a restructuring of the board, the opportunity for DNAG to purchase its 18.3% discounted ownership share, and finally, after the IPO there will be another restructuing of the board with the implication that it would be positive for DNAG.
7. Finally, the radio advertising they tried in New York City last October at a cost of $20,000 resulted in 3 sales whereas advertising on radio in Los Angeles got 300 sales. They don't have an easy way of closing a sale on Ancestry by DNA so are experimenting with various strategies. Richard was enthusiastic about the dental strategy. They have 7-8 dentists signed up with applications from 4 or 5 more. Each becomes a distributor.
My impression is that these guys are for real, they are in it for the long haul and as Tony said "even the early investors if they are patient will realize a nice return on their investment". This is a long term play in my mind. I am just waiting for when this stock starts to turn because I think it will then be one long upward climb.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=18584116
"Interesting blurb about Eli Lily in that article, eh?"
or
Frog -
"DNAG is involved because Pfizer gave up on it. No one disputes that."
I must have missed this. Can you recall any evidence to support this claim?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15912166
make your mind
Pfizer or Eli Lilly
0.012/0.011
DNAPrint Genomics, Inc. formed a wholly owned subsidiary in 2005, known as DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for the development of diagnostic and pharmaceutical products. "We are exploring funding alternatives for DNAPrint(TM) Pharmaceuticals, including venture capital, spin-out and licensing and partnering, because the continued funding by the parent is becoming more difficult. We have sold the Biofrontera shares during late 2006 and early 2007 to give us some much-needed short-term funding. We have received proceeds of $1.8 million through February and will receive 500,000 euros (approx. $0.6 million) a month from March through September and 443,240 euros (approximately $.6 million) in October. This will provide us with a source of funding until we get additional funding secured. We hope to have a funding strategy in place by the second half of 2007 which will alleviate the financial burden on DNAPrint(TM) Genomics, Inc.," stated Mr. Gabriel.
"Clearly, our challenge going forward is to control costs, keep our projects running, continue the sales momentum that we have achieved with the ancestry and genotyping products, and to find ways to increase genotyping and general fee income," stated Mr. Gabriel. "To that end, one of our endeavors for 2007 will be to join with law enforcement agencies nationwide in supporting legislation before Congress that provides for the full funding of DNA testing in crime scene investigations. Currently, DNA test reimbursements are at a low percentage of real costs. We need to convince our lawmakers that money spent on DNA testing can yield returns in the form of identifying and apprehending suspects and obtaining convictions. We are also aggressively pursuing business in the health care arena using our underlying DNA and diagnostic technologies to help clinicians advance diagnostics and therapeutics in addition to pursuing our regular business interests of DNA testing and services" he stated.
2006 Highlights and Milestones
-- Q4 revenue of $525,000, an increase of 42% over last year
-- Year-end revenues of $2.4 million, an increase of 91% over 2005
-- Q4 Genotyping revenue of $170,000, an increase of 643% over Q4 2005
-- Full-year Genotyping revenue of $770,000, an increase of 330% over
full-year 2005
-- Full-year revenue of $1.6 million for Ancestry products, an increase
73% over 2005
-- Invested $6.4 million in research and development of our products
during 2006
-- Two patents granted and significant progress made on research into new
therapies for statin-induced myalgia and depression
-- Investment in Biofrontera shares were recorded at $7.9 million at
yearend as Biofrontera went public during October 2006
In 2006, research and development costs increased to $6,427,115 from $2,122,383 in 2005, an increase of 202.8%. The increase in research and development expense resulted primarily from research in various projects in the development pipeline, including DNAPrint(TM) Pharmaceutical's EPO project, the ADHD project, the Statinome project, the CD59 diabetes project, the post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) project and various amounts invested in research samples used to expand the current product lines.
"We are certainly pleased that so many of our existing products have found acceptance in the marketplace," stated Mr. Gabriel. "We are particularly excited that two patents were granted to DNAPrint(TM) during 2006 -- one for identifying links between gene sequences and medical traits and another for the discovery of a genetic marker for statin-induced myalgia. We look forward to the successful completion of other research projects underway, especially the PT 401 'Super' EPO Dimer for the treatment of anemia, which is undertaken with Harvard Medical School's Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital in Boston. We also are pleased to continue support of the Statinome project for the detection of myalgia, or severe muscle pain, in certain patients, and the Ovanome project, a genetic test for predicting an ovarian cancer patient's response to some first-regimen chemotherapy."
Mr. Gabriel continued, "We have also made rapid progress in funding the development of the CD59 diabetic test product, and we are excited about the new results that will be published either second or third quarter of this year. Diabetes is the number one health crisis facing the U.S. and our work with Harvard Medical School's Dr. Jose Halperin and Dr. Michael Chorev on the CD59 test, is extremely exciting to us and the researchers on both teams."
DNAPrint kept its selling, general and administrative costs increased to only $3,194,122 compared to $2,864,548 for the same period in the prior year, an increase of only 11.5%.