InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 10
Posts 4220
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/10/2003

Re: retired investor post# 16218

Friday, 07/30/2004 12:56:57 PM

Friday, July 30, 2004 12:56:57 PM

Post# of 82595
retired investor,

This is a very important point and it raises many questions.

The current relationship between the 'pharma' and the rest of the health industry consists of specific ailments being targeted by a number of independently derived drug solutions in competition with each other. This model has an obvious 'niche' in it for classifiers that help to connect the correct drug to the appropriate individual. As you have mentioned the drug companies are not necessarily interested in supporting such a niche.

On the other hand, a side benefit of the effort to create a classifier also renders other information. Information that can, if discovered early in the development process, actually influence the eventual drug. Perhaps making it more 'universal' in scope or conversely, more finely targeted to a specific trait or population group. While this is a beneficial outcome to the patients and the industry, it does not necessarily have a viable business application. It is obvious that while such a service would be beneficial to a drug manufacturer, if there is no associated classifier there will be no revenue stream for DNAP.

Eventually, it would seem obvious that, given the capability of the platform, if one were able to develop drugs independently there would be obvious revenue ramifications. Until that time, it is difficult to see the path.

We have heard that there are to be a number of clinical trials initiated (or already running) in the near future (did I hear 20?). Given the statements by Frudakis regarding the lack of 'big' money in classifiers, what path is DNAP taking with Moffit in these trials? Are they developing classifiers that don't generate 'big revenue', or are they helping to develop drugs that don't require them? If they assist in the development of drugs that don't need classifiers because they are already targeted to specific populations or are universally applicable to specific diseases, then who 'owns' the drug, and who benefits financially?

It is clear that DNAP sees the future in the development of their own drugs. It is also clear why the development of the previous flagship products such as Statinome have slowed. What is not clear is how the present path will get us to the drug company model and how long it will take. Rmember that a new drug takes many years to develop to marketability.

regards,
frog