Yeah, I was hoping for more ADIF discussion. Nanopatent was kind enough to reply, both times. Maybe Big Kahuna or someone else has more information.
ADIF is a bit of a black box to me. That may be intentional and needed - maybe due to proprietary and potential security concerns.
I can be corrected on this, but my understanding from putting together various pieces (I haven't done a recent review, so this may be a little rough):
Dr. Diwan has scoured the literature to put together a comprehensive electronic library of potential ligands to mimic cellular entities necessary for viral interaction/entry/infection.
A physical library of many of those ligands is or has been stockpiled.
A physical stockpile of nano micelles is or will be also available.
The ligands can be attached to the nano micelles in various combinations to provide various alternative nanoviricides (this is where the licensing/IP issues may come into play).
These nanoviricide candidates can then be tested in short order against field-collected samples to select for greatest efficacy. That candidate can then be produced in in small batches initially and then scaled up to larger batches.
I don't think they have all these pieces in place - particularly the scale up part. Not much evidence that it is not a "pipe dream" as you say, but that may not be forthcoming as I stated earlier. It is at least theoretically possible as I understand it.
But aside from proof of concept and readiness, my concerns are with the IP. NNVC holds licensing rights to nanoviricides to treat a limited number of very specific viruses.
If NNVC presumably holds the IP rights to ADIF (which seems implied by their Annual and Quarterly Reports), shouldn't they also hold the rights to all prospective candidates and the lead candidates generated with ADIF?
But that would seem to go against the limited licensing from Theracour.
It would seem this is another conflict of interest if it turns out that drug candidates that NNVC generates through ADIF are still covered by Theracour's IP. They would have to negotiate terms of licensing which would add delays to what is supposed to be a rapid response technology. Or worse, NNVC would provide candidates with their ADIF to which they had no IP rights to the benefit of Theracour - either for their own separate development efforts or at least the strengthening their negotiating position for licensing back to NNVC.
