Replies to post #46973 on NanoViricides Inc. (NNVC)

[Ligander]

Injectable flu treatments would appear to be a pretty limited market. It would seem a whole new round of animal tests using pills would take another few years. Then they could apply for an IND I guess.

Where will the money for all that come from? To date is has only come from quadrupling the float.

Did Dr. Seymour ever say he was going to Africa this month? If there was a PR to that effect I missed it.

Sounds like just a rumour.

[BonelessCat]

Method of delivery is irrelevant in a head to head efficacy challenge. In such a test one seeks to determine how the two compare, the most effective prescribed standard against the new drug. TamiFlu in the oral form is that approved drug and standard. Prescribed delivery for that drug is oral. The current form of FluCide is delivered as an injection.

The test demonstrated several things. Since there is a question of penetration of the nanomicelle to heavily congested respiratory areas, one thing demonstrated is that the injectable FluCide does deliver to infected regions from the circulatory system. Secondly, in life threatening cases of influenza, the mice were gonna die, the injection salvaged 50% of the mice where tamiflu saved none. Third, under therapeutic standards of delivery at the time, FluCide delivered a 15x reduction of viral load as compared to tamiflu.

Yes, in clinical use, method of delivery is important and relevant. Tamiflu now is approved in an intravenous form in order to bring the drug levels in the patient more quickly to therapeutic levels in cases where that is needed or when oral delivery is impractical. And, yes it would be interesting to see the results of a challenge between the two injectable forms. However, given the nature of TamiFlu, a highly toxic neuraminidase inhibitor that has a very narrow dosage range between therapeutic levels and levels when toxic outcomes become evident, I would doubt the results would be much different.