Interesting reading some of the reaction to $NGM - despite the superficially sensible MoA, it never seemed likely an anti-C3 would work in GA...
Why not? After all, genetic variation that reduces function of the C3 inhibitor CFH is a causative factor in GA…
1/n
And the $APLS C3 inhibitor Empaveli pegcetacoplan had its NDA accepted by FDA earlier this year, although it wasnt as effective as some had hoped
The devil is in the detail: complement activation in GA occurs predominantly in Bruch’s Membrane - a tough place to get access
2/n
It is well-known that antibodies cannot penetrate Bruch’s Membrane, surely casting into doubt the primary hypothesis for NGM621 efficacy in GA
So the CATALINA #fail today seemed predictable
3/n
Empaveli, being a smaller molecule, may have greater access but likely is still inefficient as a C3 inhibitor in the eye. The real prize is still up for grabs in GA - small molecules? Anti-CFB acting systemically? Recombinant CFHs?
4/4
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Diseases of ageing are quite distinct from conventional diseases with a genetic basis - revealsed by the incidence profile with age #MethuselahHealth
Diseases of ageing occur because the machine wears out rather than because one of the components was faulty. Ageing is a property of the system not its parts…
The paradigm for pharma has become the “genetically-validated target” - which has proved excellent at fixing diseases caused by defective parts (mostly the “rare diseases”). But it totally fails in the prevalent age-related diseases, where the system falls apart
This chimes with our work at #MethuselahHealth - where we have uncovered complement regulation as a key player in ageing. Around 50yo we see significant “innate autoimmunity” as proteome errors accumulate and trigger self-recognition
This in turn results in a suppression of complement to prevent “self-immolation”, so reducing protection against infections. But these changes in complement balance also mean that when rampant infection does occur the amount of collateral damage is much greater in the elderly
This is interesting. The provocative part is not the data, nor as most of the rep;ones in this thread focus on, estimates of CFR but the striking difference between US and Europe
Important to spend some time thinking about the origin of the difference
The proportion of deaths that are people <65 is almost 10x higher in NYC than European epicenters. But this raw figure doesn’t correct for the age distribution of the whole population - New Yorkers likely much younger on average than citizens of Lombardy
So younger people are bound to be a higher percentage of those infected and hence if those dying. It’s also possible poorer younger people live at highest density in US whereas in Europe it is the elderly who live at higher density (eg in care homes)
@JohnOspanov Ok. So time for some more speculation on where we are in the #COVID19 epidemic in UK. Yes, what follows is my OPINION so don’t waste your time telling me I’m wrong - because none of us know
1/n
@JohnOspanov My guess is that when random sample serology is reported for the UK we will have 5-10% antibody positive (5% if you did it now, 10% if you wait til next weekend)
That will also reflect some geographic variability with some area below 1% and others above 20%
2/n
@JohnOspanov Why that high? Because the evidence is that the UK was “lucky” and imported lots of independent simultaneous infections - possibly from skiers returning from Val d’Aosta in Northern Italy
ABO blood groups are caused by different sugar groups that decorate the outside of your red blood cells. A and B have extra sugars (called fucose) on them, which are missing in group O
2/n
The A blood group antigen structureky resembles another sugar group called “alpha-gal” that humans lack but every other species possesses (because we deleted the enzyme alpha-galactosyl transferase) very early in Hunan evolution
3/n
I do think healthcare professionals need to be particularly careful. It seems clear that severe symptoms result from high viral load. If the virus gets to very high copy number before your adaptive immune response kicks in you are at very high risk if ARDS
1/n
If you are healthy & immunocompetant, then a major determinant of the outcome if that race will be initial exposure. If I am infected by 1cparticle, it takes 10 doubling times to get to 1000 particles - if I’m infected by 1000 particles simultaneously I’m there in zero time
2/n
So the higher the initial infectious load the shorter the time to any given threshold if viral load - and if that makes it shorter than the time taken to mount the immune response then severe symptoms result
3/n