"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!

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.