Precision Virologics
David Curiel, interim CEO of Precision Virologics
Late last year, Washington University cancer biologist Dr. David Curiel received a phone call from a journalist with the premier newspaper in Spain. “He said, ‘Dr. Curiel, there is a woman in Hungary getting a lot of credit as the mother of the COVID vaccine,’” Curiel says. “'Do you realize you’re the father?’” While researching a story on the history of messenger RNA vaccines, the reporter found that, in 1995, Curiel was the first person to publish proof of concept that mRNA could work as a vaccine. Curiel’s research was the foundation for the breakthrough vaccines developed by Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech. But Curiel still has another role to play in the effort to end the COVID-19 pandemic. As the interim CEO of St. Louis–based biotech firm Precision Virologics, he has developed a nasal vaccine based on an entirely different vector—an adenovirus, instead of mRNA—and has partnered with an Indian manufacturer, Bharat Biotech, to produce it.
Were you surprised to learn of your role in the development of mRNA vaccines?
It’s funny. I sort of knew it was true, but I wasn’t going around touting the fact. I did this in 1995, and it sort of fell off the radar. I immediately saw the potential and would have developed it but for the absence of an industry partner to work with to solve the production pieces.
What is the future for mRNA vaccines?
I can’t overstate this: mRNA is a useful and an exciting technology. But it may not end up being the best COVID vaccine. The exciting, distinguishing thing about mRNA is you get from the pathogen to a vaccine agent quite shortly. The downside is the storage requirement is harder and that issue hasn’t been solved.
How did you come to work on a nasal vaccine for COVID-19?
One of the advantages of working at Wash. U. is we have these world-class people. Once COVID hit, I started working with viral immunologist Mike Diamond and we talked about exploring all possible routes, including intranasal. At a time when reports were coming out quickly, we showed not only that intranasal worked, but that it accomplished sterilizing immunity. It eradicated the virus from all of the upper respiratory tract. Not only are you protecting the vaccinee, but you’re potentially limiting lateral transmission.
Why the nose?
There are two sides. For the company, you don’t have to make as much. That’s sometimes the limiting facet of a vaccine’s economic viability. The second thing is that it’s a single dose. That’s very important in terms of compliance.
Isn’t there also something to be said for the ease with which it is administered?
It’s so much easier and so much less invasive. From an implementation standpoint, you can run patients through much more quickly.
How gratifying is it to have your research be part of the solution to getting out of the pandemic?
It’s exciting in two regards. When I made the observation about RNA, I knew it was exciting and full of potential. Others took it forward and it’s exciting to have an original idea that later plays out.
What’s the other aspect that excites you?
For many years after that observation, I was committed to adenovirus as a vector. So I’ve enjoyed both sides of this: having an original invention recognized and having something I’ve committed 30 years to, adenovirus, now being recognized as something useful and hopeful.
