Sirna Update

Controversial & Unproven Methods Restricted: Genetic Therapy, X-Ray, Photodynamic
#41

“Combining the expertise of both companies will significantly accelerate the development of RNAi-based therapeutics.”

That from the CEO of Sirna. WOW! So that was the BIG news that people were expecting. Damn, really wish I had bought the stock now!
Oh well hopefully this is good news. The 100 billion at Merck’s disposal should help speed things up, not to mention grease the wheels with the FDA (not that that is necessarily a good thing - I just mean that they probably have a better idea of how the approval process works, etc).

I can’t see them halting development on the hairless product when they are so close to Phase I, especially since the success of this product alone will justify the $1 billion price they just paid for Sirna.

I think Sirna realized that they needed a bigger partner if they are to tackle the major diseases currently in their pipeline.
Hopefully this is good news for all people awaiting developments in Sirna’s pipeline and for the development of this technology as a whole.

Certainly this area seems to be heating up fast in the medical world!

#42

Well it wasn’t a hostile take over which is good. It was something the stock holders owning a majority of the stock agreed upon. I believe it will not be finalized until the end of first quarter or second quarter of 2007.

I do hope everything remains the same and no developments are cancelled.

#43

hi everybody,

I think i have a very interesting link for you.
Its a database for worlwide patents of the european patent office.

You can type in e.g. “hair removal” and get a list of all patents in this area.

I even found the patent of Angela Christiano on the third site. A very good description of the “magic cream”. As far as i can remember it will NOT have a permanenent effect. So continuous application is necessary. However, this patent is older than 2 years and progress was made.

You also find a patent of the applisonix from israel.

But i think that if you combine the sirna, photoderma, pharmaquest and applisonix applications a nearly permanent
removal can really be possible. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

http://gb.espacenet.com/search97cgi/s97_cgi.exe?Action=FormGen&Template=gb/en/quick.hts

#44

Wow, thanks for that! The document seems that it could answer certain questions about their goals in regards to permanence, if the hair needs to be epilated first (yes?), and so on. When I have more time I’ll give that a good read, but just flicking through Cristiano’s patent (huge document) I found this interesting paragraph:

“[0087] Applicant’s have found that RNAi can be used to inhibit translation from dsg4 and/or nude protein mRNA, resulting in hair removal or inhibition of hair growth. This hair removal generally is reversible by ceasing application of the RNAi inducing oligonucleotide, thus providing cosmetic and therapeutic methods, as well as methods useful for laboratory experimental mammals, and for dehairing in the leather industry. For long term or even permanent hair removal, such inhibition of dsg4 and/or nude mRNA can be combined with inhibition of hairless expression, e.g., using RNAi inhibition of hairless mRNA.”

So it appears that they may eventually be able to offer different topical applications of varying strength depending on how long a client wishes to stay hair free?
However my guess is that the “permanent” application will never be made because:

  1. It would mean that the customer would only need to purchase the product once and therefore hurts sales in the long run as more and more people achieve their permanent “fix”. ie. the anti-thesis of any corporate product.

  2. A mistake by the applying physician would mean permanent hair removal in an area that the client may not have wanted such a result, thus opening up the physician and perhaps Sirna to costly lawsuits.

I really can’t think of any product out there that offers a permanent solution to anything. It seems to me that the medical/pharmacutical world aren’t really interested in “cures” but only interested in “treatments” which people have to continually take over and over, as this is truely where the profits lie.
I hope Sirna will be different but I doubt it. Merck certainly know how this game is played.

On second thought the only thing I can think of is the laser eye surgery, I think that is a “permanent” correction of your vision…but no doubt involves constant visits to the optomitrist to ensure things are “okay” and probably some eyedrops to take everyday for the rest of your life or something, so they get your money that way! Plus the prodcedure itself is very expensive as well.

Sorry I think I’m just overly cynical of corporate greed…but even if Sirna’s “magic cream” isn’t 100% permanent I still think a cream that could painlessly remove (and keep hair away) for a month or so would still be a dramatic improvement over painfull and embarassing laser/waxing sessions. As if the cream really doesn’t have a permanent effect I am sure it could be sold safely for home use eventually. Also a cream based product really seems to be the ideal way to treat the problem as many areas on the body are difficult to reach and treat properly with laser/waxing/etc.

I actually said a long time ago that I bet the real task for Sirna, Quest, PhotoDerma, etc is making sure that the product ISN’T too permanent and much of their time would be spent on finding a balance in strength so that people would be satisfied of its long term effects but still have to purchase it over and over if they wanted to continue to enjoy those effects.

I hope I’m wrong in all this, and that a “permanent” solution is what researchers are gunning for…I guess we will see.

#45

Eddy,

You make some valid points, but I think there are other things to consider. I have not read the document yet so I can’t comment on that.

Sirna’s hairless gel/cream Trichozyme I believe is a breakthrough. I don’t think Sirna would have taken on this project if they didn’t see promise. They also would not still be touting it as permanent if the results of both invitro and invivo studies showed otherwise. If the results of both of these two studies proved less than promising, I think it would have been dropped.

I believe the whole reason why this product would be administered through a physician is because of its permanence. I don’t think you would want to have this cream available by prescription or on drug store shelves. I could just imagine some of the problems that would arise from this. I’ve heard of people having their heads and eye brows shaved at parties after they have passed out. A permanent hair remover in the wrong hands would not be good.

As far as possible liabilities to Sirna or a physician administering this product to someone and they then turning around years later to bring up a frivolous lawsuit…again, I don’t think that will happen. It hasn’t happened with laser which shows permanence in some individuals and I don’t think it’s happened with electrolysis. IF it’s administered by a physician, it would be a voluntary medical treatment and a waiver of some sort would possibly need to be signed prior to treatment along with information on the implications of the treatment.

In the worst case scenario, Trichozyme proves to be a product that needs to be used more than once (as in it’s not a permanent solution). IF that is the case, Sirna would have to know the benefits of this product outweigh all other treatments available…meaning, it’s painless and lasts long enough so people do not seek other treatments available. It would make no sense for Sirna (or Merck for that matter) to put so much time, effort and money in to a product that only lasts as long as any other depilatory on the market. The costs would also have to be competitive with other treatments IF it proves to not be a permanent solution.

#46

I read in an article tonight that there is a possibility Merck may not continue on with Sirna’s current pipeline. Of course this is just one so called “expert.” He mentioned that Merck’s main objective is to get the RNA technology for oncology.

If that was the case, I wonder if Dr. Christiano would take the technology elsewhere…that is, if she was able to.

#47

Hmm that doesn’t sound good. I suppose they will determine how far along each of Sirna’s current programs are, how much more it will cost to see them through, and compare that with each program’s potential to generate profits if successful.

I understand that Merck’s goal may be in Oncology but it seems like Sirna specifically recruited these specialists (eg. Christiano and others) to deal with the application of SiRNA’s in combating dermatological conditions, in particular permanent hair removal.
i.e. I don’t think they could just switch from working in dermatology to Oncology overnight.

So unless Merck has plans to shut down the dermatology section of Sirna, give all these scientists their walking papers and run the risk of them taking their research to other competitors, they might think again and allow them to continue their developments in this area.

A topical application for permanent hair removal has the potential to be a “blockbuster” drug (this is what all pharmacutical companies dream of and is defined as any drug/treatment that can generate over $1 billion in annual sales).
Given that it is a topical treatment and nearly in its clinical stages, it should be relatively less expensive to develop in comparison with other ingested/injected drugs and promises huge rewards if they are successful.

The risk/reward factor here seems to be low for such a huge corporation as Merck and I am sure that Cristiano and the other scientists who have been working hard on this product will fight to keep development alive.

Sirna’s third quarter results should be out sometime this month so hopefully they will give some indication about progress and future plans.

#48

Eddy,

You may be right. I don’t think that anyone knows for sure what will happen. So called “experts” have a way of always being wrong.

I think it would be to Merck’s advantage to get this product out. They would profit very well if it proves to be a success.

I’m pretty certain we won’t know one way or the other until Quarter 1 '07 since that is when the sale becomes final, and it also was the possible start for Stage I trials for this product.

It would be nice to contact either Sirna or Merck in regards to this, but I’m thinking that you wouldn’t have much luck with that.

#49

yeah ive sent them a nice long email… im sure u guys have tried this too tho… ahh well if they do respond u guys will b the first to hear about it… i asked them if they were still going to continue with thier current pipeline and asked them about the hair removal in particular and i also asked them if they were gonna keep the scheduel if they do keep the present pipeline… as in will they go ahead and start clinical trials this year or next year etc.
ill keep u updated

#50

hi everybody,

also on the database-site are the guys from
www.epilar.net (or www.cosmedical.dk)

Currently they are establishing a net of b2c providers.
Maybe another possibilty.

#51

That epilar stuff seems just like all those other topicals (ie. Kalo, Epilstop, etc) which you are to apply immediately after waxing and it is supposed to inhibit hair growth, and after enough sessions stop hair growth completly…I tried Kalo myself for about 6 months and saw no improvements, just another scam which led me to this site in the search for real permanent answers…so far the only companies that seem to be working on this are Sirna, Photoderma, Quest, and Applisonix…all the rest seem to be scams. Am I wrong?

#52

Eddy,

I believe that Applisonix will be categorized more as a temporary solution. Quest and Photoderma are still up in the air. They say permanent then not, then…

#53

Just got this response from Sirna via e-mail:

“Sirna agreed to be acquired by Merck & Co. on Oct. 30, 2006. If the transaction is approved, Sirna will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Merck late in December or in Q1 ’07. There will be no new information on the hairless program until the acquisition has been completed.”

Seems to suggest that Merck is in the process of deciding whether to continue or discontinue the hairless project. As I said before I think it is in their interest to carry on development.
Most say that Phase III is the most complicated part of the clinical trials but for me I think the longest and most difficult part of developing any product is in the discovery and pre-clinical development, simply because here they have to make sure that the product is somewhat effective and safe for use on humans. After all they don’t want to kill or severely injure anyone in the trials, so most of the safety work will have to be carried out before this.
To me it would at this point be about 60% ready for the market and the rest of the development in the clinical phases is testing the exact results on humans, rather than animals, and making minor adjustments to increase safety and effectiveness.
I think if any product makes it to Phase III the biggest hurdle is getting FDA approval, which perhaps makes it the longest phase out of the three.

That said I believe most of the really hard work has probably been done by the scientists at Sirna and now they just have to refine the product in the clinical trials…I’m hoping they get the chance to do this, would be such a shame if they have to start all over again somewhere else.

#54

http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO2006068687&F=0&QPN=WO2006068687

Been looking at the patent applications again put forth by Christiano and Sirna. The above link briefly describes their “claims” of what the product will acheive.

As seen in point 2. - their goal is currently inhibition of hair for one month, possibly longer. Doesn’t really sound like permanence to me. :frowning:

As in points 3 and 4. - the hair cycle still effects the application of the product (ie. hair growth must be “synchronized” by waxing, etc before the product can be applied and the hair must be in the correct growth phase for the product to be effective). :frowning:

This of course means multiple treatments for a product that may not deliver permanent results. Far from the magic cream I think we are all hoping for! (ie. one or two treatments, with permanent results) :frowning:

I suppose the only real advantages over laser will hopefully be reduced cost, treatment of light hairs on varying skin types, and reduced pain in application (however you will still have to wax, ect beforehand so perhaps even lazer will be more painless if taking this into account?)

Oh and I forgot the best part, we only have to wait another 3-5 years for this “breakthrough”.

What I don’t understand is why would someone pay to get waxed, which typically lasts about 3-4 weeks, only to pay more to have a product applied that claims to delay hair regrowth for the same amount of time! Additionally if the hair cycle still applies one session will only treat about 30% of the hair, so essentially you will be paying to have 30% of your hair not regrow for one month (which is bascially the same as waxing anyways!?!)

Seems very idiotic to me…Sirna had better damn well come up with a more permanent product or they risk being laughed out of the market, that’s all I can say! Anything less than one year permanence will be a failure especially if multiple treatments due to the hair cycle are needed.

Anyways I’m kind of losing faith in science again…if you can’t already tell. Why can’t anyone come up with a way to KILL hair for good??? :frowning:

#55

Eddy,

I guess there is no sense worrying about it until next year. One good point is the Merck doesn’t just make vaccines, treatments for cancer etc. I noticed that they are also the makers Propecia which is used to grow hair…so the fact they are looking at other markets is a good thing.

As for Christiano’s work. I read a bit about those prior tests, but I do believe those are just that…prior tests. Over time, delivery has become more effective. According to Sirna’s website, the treatment will be permanent and painless. There is no way they will put a treatment out on the market that will make you remove the hair and then do the treatment that will last only a few weeks as best. I can see removing the hair via waxing, treatment and then no hair growth for very long amounts of time or permanency.

Again, we really don’t know until we hear something. IF Merck continues this, then that is a good sign IMO.

#56

Yep I hope your right, but the “claim” part of the patent I referred to in my earlier post was just posted a few months ago, so I am afraid it is fairly up to date with their research thus far.
Anyways, like you said they are not stupid and am sure they realise that anything less than long term inhibition or permanence will be a waste of time on their part. Especially if their treatments are subject to the hair cycle.

Guess we’ll all be holding our breath until next year for an update from Merck. I still believe Sirna offers the best hope out there for a “permanent” solution.

#57

“you are not messing with the gene, you are only blocking the messenger RNA from making a certain protein”
Will I be able to adjust how much it will block it?
Like if I have a part of my body with alot of long hair but I wish not to remove it completely but only make the area grow less and shorter hair, do you think this will be possible?
And the affected area (the hair follicles) will produce weaker hair, i.e., more thin and shorter?

#58

LEF1,

No one really knows since clinical trials have not even started. They are scheduled for this quarter (doubtful now that Merck bought Sirna) or the first quarter of 2007. It’s not known if Merck will continue on with this program or not.

IF this treatment works as is hoped, the protein that directs the hair follicle to begin growing hair will be blocked by the SIRNA which in theory will prevent ANY further growth. Again, there are a lot of questions yet to be answered, namely whether or no the program will continue on.

#59

The buyout of Sirna by Merck is complete.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/20…sit=y&npu=y

Now we should know this coming quarter if permanent hair removal is something that Merck is still interested in pursuing.

From the above article though:

“Even though Sirna’s drugs in development are in early stages, now that its compounds have come under the auspices of Merck’s research and development team and all its vast resources, they should move through clinical trials at a faster rate and with fewer costs.”

#60

hi everyone,
this is the news on Applisonix:

AppliSonix is developing an ultrasonic depilatory device that delivers ultrasonic waves to the hair root, damaging it ability to function for an extended period. The product will first be developed for use by doctors and cosmeticians, but the company hopes to develop a product for use at home. The company said that its product is more effective and safer than laser or visible wavelength-based depilatory devices, and that it can be used by both blondes and brunettes.

AppliSonix has already developed a prototype, and it is due to undergo abbreviated US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) marketing approval procedure (510k). If all goes according to plan, the product’s market launch will be in 2009.

The rest can be found here:

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2007/01/18/2262215.htm