Absolutely Sean. They're looking to completely cure HIV and they can't because it keeps creating a viral reservoir in the body. They can not eradicate the viral reservoir, and therefore can't get rid of the disease.
Pretty awesome idea to deliver LL via viral capsid ONLY to B and T cells and not allowing LL to bind to other CCR5 receptors throughout the body.
Not sure what was so bad about sub-q and having LL bind to all CCR5 at 100% RO because we've been doing that very safely for 8 years w/o any ASE. So why is it so important not to have it bind to all the CCR5 in the body?
As far as I know, when LL binds to CCR5, it blocks HIV from its binding site at CCR5. When LL binds, it allows CCR5 to function in the same way it was prior to it's binding. That is, CCR5 does not deform or change shape when LL binds to it. RANTES however, is a different story. When RANTES binds to CCR5, the CCR5 distorts and changes shape affecting the chemical signaling and cellular communication of other chemokines and cytokines. LL does not affect that.
So, I don't see why we could not just keep doing sub q injections binding to CCR5, but allowing the normal cellular communication and normal regulation of the immune system with 100% RO of LL, since all it really does is block RANTES and allows all other immunoregulatory processes to function as designed.
I don't understand this line:
How is this viral capsid delivery system gene therapy?
Pretty awesome idea to deliver LL via viral capsid ONLY to B and T cells and not allowing LL to bind to other CCR5 receptors throughout the body.
Not sure what was so bad about sub-q and having LL bind to all CCR5 at 100% RO because we've been doing that very safely for 8 years w/o any ASE. So why is it so important not to have it bind to all the CCR5 in the body?
As far as I know, when LL binds to CCR5, it blocks HIV from its binding site at CCR5. When LL binds, it allows CCR5 to function in the same way it was prior to it's binding. That is, CCR5 does not deform or change shape when LL binds to it. RANTES however, is a different story. When RANTES binds to CCR5, the CCR5 distorts and changes shape affecting the chemical signaling and cellular communication of other chemokines and cytokines. LL does not affect that.
So, I don't see why we could not just keep doing sub q injections binding to CCR5, but allowing the normal cellular communication and normal regulation of the immune system with 100% RO of LL, since all it really does is block RANTES and allows all other immunoregulatory processes to function as designed.
I don't understand this line:
Quote:In order to deliver Leronlimab as a gene therapy option,
How is this viral capsid delivery system gene therapy?
2
