
Show HN: Last day: New cancer drug candidates - michaelforrest
https://experiment.com/projects/test-a-new-drug-candidate-for-treating-cancer
======
AnimalMuppet
When I read this, I can't tell the difference between "crackpot" and "maybe
great idea". I guess I lean toward "maybe great idea", but the page gives off
a definite "crackpot" vibe.

Why? Too much self-promotion. No references. (Yeah, there are quotes from
people. There are no papers cited that I saw. And one of the people says how
great the author is, not how great the idea is.)

~~~
michaelforrest
There are references on the page. Follow the links!

Two WO patents are cited (linked to), wherein a patent has to provide
sufficient data, dislosure etc. to pass the patent examiner(s), who is
scientifically trained, and ultimately it must be able to stand up to scrutiny
in court, by very sophisticated (pharma compa[ny/ies]) assailants. It is a
very expensive futility if done without underlying merit.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Yes, I see the links to the patents. I was expecting links to something other
than your own patents. (That's actually part of what gives it the "crackpot"
vibe - linking to your own stuff.)

Some links to info about F1F0 ATP hydrolysis _that are not your own research_
would do a lot.

~~~
michaelforrest
It is original new research. Set in its context in the literature by the
hundreds of references cited therein. Apologies for not just copying someone
else's work. You would be well placed to actually read the
patents/data/arguments/cited references. Especially before throwing around
labels. At the end of the day, the drugs outperform in independent
standardized tests at the National Cancer Institute. One is ready to enter
Phase II clinical trials and these are soon to happen (for NSCLC). Yes there
is much more work to do. And I am trying to do it. I am the first at this and
the whole point of a patent(s) is to keep it like that (for a time): rendering
a monopoly incentive that I can hopefully raise money against to move further
foreward. Anyone that feels a tantrum coming on about patents, please look at
how the crowdfunding campaign has bombed.

~~~
gus_massa
If you are asking people money, you must answer their questions. Not the
explicit questions, the important one are the implicit questions, like "Are
you a crackpot?".

> [...] _the drugs outperform in independent standardized tests at the
> National Cancer Institute. One is ready to enter Phase II clinical trials
> and these are soon to happen (for NSCLC)._

Does it mean that one of your drugs passed the Phase I trials? It means that
it was injected to humans? And they survive??

This is a good signal that you are not a crackpot. (Or you are a very
dangerous one :) .) Why is this information not in the fundraiser post?!?! Not
in a indirect link, put it explicitly, with a short explanation of what is a
"Phase I clinical trial", an a link to the results.

Something similar happens with the comparison with Carboplatin (in my other
comment). I can Google "Carboplatin", and I finally made the search, but if
you are asking me money, put short explanation of why it is interesting to
compare to Carboplatin and a link to the Wikipedia page, and save me a few
minutes.

I trust more the review in a jornal article than in a patent, but each area
has it's own problems and uses and customs. But don't expect normal people to
be able to read patents. (What is an "embodiment"?) (Don't expect people to
follow and read the links neither.)

I think that the problem is that the post has too few explicit information. It
doesn't have the name or formula of the drug, the attack path, why it is new,
why it should be useful. Almost the only explicit technical info is the graph
at the bottom.

You can try writing a blog post about the previous drug. Write it for someone
that has an Engineering degree in Chemistry and understand the difference
between a sugar and a fat, but is not a Biology or Medical specialist. (Bonus
points, if the blogpost can be read by an Electric Engineer, that knows that
there are atoms, but don't care too much about their order.) Add a few
graphics, 3 or 4, graphics are good.

Post the blog about the previous drug here, and let's hope that it got
traction and you get some feedback. Once the main concerns are fixed, use the
blog post as a template for a new fundraiser. Something like:

* Hello.

* My previous drug is very good (copy the whole blog post here)

* Why I think my new drug is better (not too long)

* Please give me money for a lab test (some additional details)

~~~
michaelforrest
The drug going into Phase II isn't the one that the experiment.com page
relates to (although they are both disclosed in the same WO patent). There are
multiple drugs and so to keep things simple/clear the experiment.com just
restricts to the drug it is asking for funding to synthesize. There are word
limits when writing an experiment.com page and keeping it simple is emphasized
- indeed I fell foul off this time and time again and so most of the writing
on that page is barely mine as it was edited so much. But I think for the
purpose, how it is now is better than I could have done alone.

Understanding the patents is the level which needs to be reached to really
understand the work. Indeed, those patents cite patents, which also need to be
understood. Hiding from patents is a no go to get on in this field. So, on an
experiment.com page, full understanding was never going to come (but the links
are there for those sufficiently interested/qualified).

But I want to thank you so much for your interest and advice. Very gratefully
received. But somewhat academic now as the campaign has near on ended (well
short of goal). A shame. But it has happened.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Ah, I see. So you've got the format (and style, and to some degree content)
fixed for you by experiment.com? That ties your hands pretty hard.

I'd do this (if you can within their rules): Very early on the page, I'd put a
link that says "For the technical details, go here." Link to a page that is
not on experiment.com. Go deeper there.

As I said, _if they let you..._

------
michaelforrest
gus_massa - in response to your points prior, please see the new figure at the
bottom of the experiment.com page.

Please also see, for an overview of my (bootstrapped) company, now raising:
[https://angel.co/company/biophysical-
therapeutics](https://angel.co/company/biophysical-therapeutics)

For more technical please see:
[https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/docs2/pct/WO2019012149/p...](https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/docs2/pct/WO2019012149/pdf/PpAUZP5Zqw9fmNqL8LoqeF4ZqdXy0OF1dO7_6PtxXGdUgRVmMa2Nc1YlBsuZGzf7oG8RDBP2TOSgzMNAOTWq8zhcFsRB1mtaZr8tTwmjhI0vitaqTSlSzJutGb8eVEWp?docId=id00000045720432&psAuth=z8TolF04c1pSeYym8s1-CHIaLeif5s78ruenoiXZ-
ZI)

~~~
gus_massa
Some relevant parts of
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carboplatin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carboplatin)

> _It is on the World Health Organization 's List of Essential Medicines, the
> most effective and safe medicines needed in a health system._

This is discussed in the patent, but not in the submission. Add something
about it. I don't know which are the current preferred drugs against cancer.

The patent takes forever to load. I got more luck with
[https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf;jsessionid...](https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf;jsessionid=FCC09B14C354AEBCB207B511F1A03669.wapp2nB?docId=WO2019012149&tab=PCTDESCRIPTION&office=&prevFilter=&sortOption=Pub+Date+Desc&queryString=&recNum=8170&maxRec=73493415)
and
[https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2018134265A1/en](https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2018134265A1/en)

The language of patents is very very very difficult to read. (It's not your
fauls, it's standard patent legalese.)Do you have a link to a research paper
with similar content?

<IIUC> This drug block the hydrolysis (destruction) of the ATP in mitochondria
of the cancer cells. Usually the mitochondria produce ATP, but in this cancer
cells the activity of the mitochondria is too low. The mitochondria also
produce other useful molecules like NADPH while producing ATP. And if part of
the APT is not destroyed, they can't produce the other useful molecules and
the cell dies.</IIUC>

How bad is that?

I don't know if you can write a very simplified explanation without breaking
the FDA rules or something, but add more information in the site. The graphic
of the molecules are always nice. (And the 3D render is even nicer, in spite
it's not so useful. Add both.)

~~~
michaelforrest
Carboplatin is still used very prevalently for many cancers. It is now off
patent, and old, but sitll in very common use in developed and developing
countries. It is one of the most used cancer drugs.

I've led with patents rather than papers because the latter can prevent the
former ("prior art"). And no company will take a drug through clinical trials
without a patent(s), and it is typically only companies that fund trials
(espcially Phase III). So, publishing without patenting, if you actually have
something promising, is near on a crime. It effectively renders it forever
lost. This isn't actually as well known as it should be amongst researchers.
Although most will never get to any point that this is of concern anyhow.

RE: the crowdfunding page, thank you for your tips/advice on how to make it
better, but today is the last day and as you can see....it is a bust. So, that
is that.

