Cypress Bioscience Inc. (NasdaqGM: CYPB ) Cypress Bioscience, Inc. is developing therapeutics and personalized medicine services, to facilitate improved and individualized patient care. Cypress’ goal is to address the evolving needs of specialist physicians and their patients by identifying unmet medical needs in the areas of pain, rheumatology, and physical medicine and rehabilitation, including challenging disorders such as fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis. We intend to use this approach to improve patient care and create a unique partnership with physicians.

I think Liz’s argument is that the FDA route is flawed because it 1) Takes too long whilst patients are dying now, 2) Still results in many withdrawn drugs, 3) Is too expensive to pursue for all but the biggest Pharma companies, AND 4) Results in very expensive treatments (to recoup those costs).

Young, J. M. et al. Effect of atorvastatin on plasma levels of asymmetric dimethylarginine in patients with non-ischaemic heart failure. European journal of heart failure 10, 463–466, doi: 10.1016/j.ejheart.2008.03.010 (2008).

BioTime Inc. (OTCBB: BTIM ) BioTime, headquartered in Alameda, California, develops blood plasma volume expanders, blood replacement solutions for hypothermic (low temperature) surgery, organ preservation solutions, and technology for use in surgery, emergency trauma treatment and other applications. BioTime’s lead product Hextend is manufactured and distributed in the U.S. by Hospira, Inc. and in South Korea by CJ CheilJedang Corp. under exclusive licensing agreements.

For so long as we remain an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, we intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various requirements that are applicable to public companies that are not “emerging growth companies” including:

Financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC 51473175, 31200741), Chinese Academy of Sciences, City University of Hong Kong Strategic Research Grant (SRG) No. 7004188, and Hong Kong Research Grants Council (RGC) General Research Funds (GRF) No. CityU 112212 is acknowledged.

Pursuant to the Companies Law and regulations promulgated thereunder with respect to the convening of general meetings in a public company, shareholder meetings generally require prior notice of not less than 21 days, and for certain matters specified in the Companies Law, not less than 35 days. The function of the annual general meeting is to elect directors in accordance with the Articles, receive and consider the profit and loss account, the balance sheet and the ordinary reports and accounts of the directors and auditors, appoint auditors and fix their remuneration and transact any other business which under the Articles or applicable law may be transacted by the shareholders of a company in general meeting.

Natural killer (NK) cells are essential for immunosurveillance against transformed cells. Transient receptor potential melastatin 2 (TRPM2) is a Ca2+-permeable cation channel gated by ADP-ribose (ADPR). However, the role of TRPM2-mediated Ca2+ signaling in the antitumor response of NK cells has not been explored. Here, we show that ADPR-mediated Ca2+ signaling is important for cytolytic granule polarization and degranulation but not involved in target cell recognition by NK cells. The key steps of this pathway are: 1) the activation of intracellular CD38 by protein kinase A following the interaction of the NK cell with a tumor cell results in the production of ADPR, 2) ADPR targets TRPM2 channels on cytolytic granules, and 3) TRPM2-mediated Ca2+ signaling induces cytolytic granule polarization and degranulation, resulting in antitumor activity. NK cells treated with 8-Br-ADPR, an ADPR antagonist, as well as NK cells from Cd38−/− mice showed reduced tumor-induced granule polarization, degranulation, granzyme B secretion, and cytotoxicity of NK cells. Furthermore, TRPM2-deficient NK cells showed an intrinsic defect in tumoricidal activity. These results highlight CD38, ADPR, and TRPM2 as key players in the specialized Ca2+ signaling system involved in the antitumor activity of NK cells.

Unless the appointing director limits the time or scope of the appointment, the appointment is effective for all purposes until the earlier of (i) the appointing director ceasing to be a director; (ii) the appointing director terminating the appointment; or (iii) the occurrence, with respect to the alternate, of any of the circumstances under which a director shall vacate his or her office. The appointment of an alternate director does not in itself diminish the responsibility of the appointing director as a director. An alternate director is solely responsible for his or her actions and omissions and is not deemed an agent of the appointing director. Under the Companies Law, external directors cannot generally appoint alternate directors, and a person who is not qualified to be appointed as an “independent” director may not be appointed as an alternate to an independent director. See “Item 6—Directors, Senior Management and Employees—C. Board Practices.” At present, there are no effective appointments of alternate directors for our Board.

        The weighted average assumptions used to estimate the grant date fair value of the stock options using the Black-Scholes option pricing model were as follows:

In addition, our patents and patent applications could face challenges. Any of these challenges, if successful, could result in the invalidation of, or in a narrowing of the scope of, any of our patents and patent applications subject to challenge. Any of these challenges, regardless of their success, would likely be time consuming and expensive to defend and resolve and would divert our management’s time and attention.

        Moreover, because the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, our patents or pending patent applications may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the U.S. and abroad. There is no assurance that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found. If such prior art exists, it may be used to invalidate a patent, or may prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. For example, such patent filings may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, or to other patent offices around the world. It is often the case that such third-party submissions may be made anonymously such that we would not have information regarding the name of the party challenging our intellectual property. Alternately or additionally, we may become involved in post-grant review procedures, oppositions, derivations, proceedings, reexaminations, inter partes review or interference proceedings, in the U.S. or elsewhere, challenging patents or patent applications in which we have rights, including patents on which we rely to protect our business. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products. In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized.