News 
Market Data 
Discover
Replies to post #158644 on Biotech Values
Moderna’s Technology
Moderna’s approach is a gene therapy one. However, while classical gene therapy involves the use of DNA vectors for expressing therapeutic proteins, Moderna aims to circumvent the need for DNA, which have certain regulatory and safety drawbacks, and deliver instead messenger RNAs encoding for the same proteins. This, in fact, is not a new idea and particularly popular in the immunotherapy field (albeit delivered ex vivo here, by electroporation). Duke University for example had a clinical RNAi Therapeutics program that involved the transfection of mRNAs along with siRNAs (cancer vaccine).
A 2013 Nature Protocols paper by the company’s scientific co-founder Derrick Rossi also leaves me scratching my head as to why AstraZeneca concluded that Moderna’s IP was worth $240M to them. According to the protocol, the mRNAs are generated by normal in vitro phage polymerase transcription as you would do in the lab using Life Technology’s MEGAscript kit. The only difference from the standard protocol may be that modified CTPs and UTPs were included. This is supposed to mitigate the immunostimulatory potential with RNAs just as in RNAi Therapeutics and also contribute to the stability of the long RNAs.
Based on the fact that neither the concept of mRNA Therapeutics are novel nor the RNA modification strategy unexpected, I expect that Moderna has yet to come out with their secret sauce and that the Nature Protocol may be misleading. I therefore look forward to studying the patent applications, two of which curiously just published today. It must be the IP that explains why AZ took a $240M license, to get a sense of the secret sauce. But still, given the hundreds of nucleotide modifications available, it seems hard to fathom that Moderna's a blocking IP position, and why pay $240M if not a blocking one?
