Ok, I'll say it. Great find mingwan0...this is obviously the patent application referred to in the August 20, 2002 PR concerning the 2,425 SNP's and the "phenomena" discovered by DNAPrint. Here's the relevant excerpt:
As such, DNAPrint believes it is the first to claim markers of this type and elucidate the potential of this new subset of the variable human genome as specifically relevant for predicting drug response.
The new patent application could provide DNAPrint a tremendous advantage towards developing pharmacogenomics classifiers that are specific, sensitive and predictively powerful enough for routine clinical use. "Most of these SNPs have been ignored by the genomics community. Though others may have unwittingly and indirectly linked a very small fraction of these SNPs with variable drug response, technical and conceptual considerations have evidently prevented them from yet recognizing the underlying fundamentals of these associations," said Tony Frudakis, Ph.D., DNAPrint's CEO. "Such recognition would be required to generate a competitive patent application." Indeed, a review of the journal and patent literature reveals no reports describing the phenomena that the Company believes cause the linkages.
...To maintain its competitive advantage, the company will refrain from presenting details of the discovery until the findings are published by the US Patent and Trademark Office.
And of course, just a week later we got this one which has kind of fallen off the radar:
DNAPrint Obtains a Supply Agreement on the LNA Technology From Exiqon
Wednesday August 28, 11:29 am ET
Press Release Source: DNAPrint genomics, Inc.
SARASOTA, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 28, 2002--DNAPrint genomics, Inc. (OTCBB:DNAP - News) announced today that it has obtained a non-exclusive right of supply from the Danish company Exiqon A/S to incorporate Locked Nucleic Acid (LNA(TM)) technology into certain of its pharmacogenomics and forensics tests.
DNAPrint kits use small DNA probes to query specific single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within an individual's genome. The probes contain molecular "addresses" that targets each particular SNP much like a street address targets a postal letter. Most kits made today contain natural DNA; however there are a number of technical advantages associated with using artificially modified DNA molecules instead. The supply agreement signed today enables DNAPrint to use a specially modified DNA called LNA(TM) in the construction of its test kits. Exiqon holds the patent for the LNA(TM) technology.
The use of LNA(TM) (Locked Nucleic Acid) is expected to provide superior technical performance and robustness for DNAprint kits and services. LNA(TM) is a novel class of DNA analogs that provide outstanding improvements in a number of key DNA hybridization properties. Of paramount importance for diagnostic use, the technology combines exquisite binding affinity towards complementary DNA, but with an unusual ability to discriminate between matching and mismatching target sequences. This quality makes LNA(TM) ideal for SNP (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism) detection, particularly within the context of gene families. The term "Locked Nucleic Acids" was coined by Exiqon to emphasize that the usual conformational freedom of the furanose ring in standard nucleosides is restricted in LNA(TM) due to a methylene linker connecting the 2'-O position to the 4'-C position. This restriction accounts for the enhanced specificity.
Terms of the open-ended supply agreement were not disclosed.
Ahhhh, but I digress...I take it you got that from the IPDL at the WIPO site. All I found was that single page. Is there more? If not, do you have a guess as to when we'll have access to the entire text? Espacenet doesn't even have this much right now.
Oh, and just wanted to mention that this is a prime example of work behind the scenes that had been going on long before we learned of it. It was just July 10, 2002 that we learned of the Penn State alliance and Shriver consulting agreement, yet this patent was filed in BOTH of their names in August 2002. Things don't normally happen QUITE that fast...LOL
Just goes to show that as hard as we look, and as much as we dig up, we still only know parts of the overall picture.
Watching and waiting...the details should prove interesting.
Later,
W2P
P.S. Does this qualify as the company having been mentioned along side of Shriver as a contributor to his research? Are these Paul McKeigue's markers, or ours? Just curious...I get confused you know.
AI
