Institutional Response to the HIV Blood Test Patent Dispute and Related Matters

INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE TO...SPUTE AND RELATED MATI'ERS http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucg...StaRepFolder/StaRep.ihtn
"If there is a problem for you then let's just forget the whole thing."
Apparently, at least as far as Gallo was concerned, "forgetting the whole thing" is precisely what
happened. In his letter to Francis, Dr. Gallo promised that he and his LTCB colleagues "will
make our input to you soon" concerning the contents of the serology paper. But according to Dr.
Francis, there were no further communications from the LTCB scientists concerning the paper.
nu'~nological (Proteins) Comparisons: Besides the serological comparisons,
immunological comparisons of the viral proteins and molecular comparisons of the nucleic
acids also were carried out. Two manuscripts resulted. Scientists from both the IP and LTCB
were coauthors on both papers; the "proteins" paper was authored principally by the IP
scientists (Chermann et al.), although the LTCB scientists performed several of the reported
experiments. The nucleic acids paper was written by LTCB scientist, Dr. Flossie Wong-Staal.
Neither paper was ever published.
The comparisons of the viral core proteins of LAI/LAV and LAI/IIIb were accomplished by
early-June 1984. These comparisons were initiated in mid-May, when Dr. M. Sarngadharan
travelled to Paris, taking with him samples of "H9/HTLV-IIIB," both lysate and live virus. The
decision to send a live cell line to the IP scientists seems to have represented a unilateral,
last-minute change in plans at the LTCB. It was a decision that would have significant
consequences. According to Dr. Montagnier:
"At the beginning, the agreement was that we would not exchange live virus, but
only detergent-treated lysates. But at the last minute, he changed his mind [Gallo]
and on May 15, 1984, his associate Dr. Sarngadharan brought live HTLV-IIIb
growing in H9 cells to our lab" (6/12/91 Montagnier-to-Hadley letter, p. 2).
Dr. Montagnier's receipt of live virus from the LTCB, in May 1984, would later be used by Dr.
(l- a s the basis for an accusation that Dr. Montagnier had contaminated his LAV with the
LTCB's IIIb (see below). Dr. Sarngadharan's OSI testimony did not illuminate why he took live
virus as well as lysate; in fact, the testimony made it clear th!t --
comparisons depended on lysate, not live virus. Dr. Montagnier, who had not asked for live
virus, may actually have harbored suspicions that he was being "set up," since, according to Dr.
Sarngadharan, he (Montagnier) suggested that he might destroy the live virus sample (6/13/90
OSI interview; annotated transcript p. 56).
The virus lysate that Dr. Sarngadharan took to Paris was used for proteins comparisons carried
oit mn id-May. The IP view of these experiments was expressed in a May 21, 1984 telephone
call from IP scientist Dr. Jean-Claude Chermann to the CDC's Dr. Donald Francis. According to
Francis' notes, the informaticn...
"Competition -- Sarang -- infected cells: competition by Francoise -- p25 [the viral
core protein] same... French side of comparison done."
Dr. Gallo himself, writing to Dr. Montagnier, later said this about these experiments:
"We have sent Sarngadharan to you to compare the proteins of LAV and HTLV-III
using our hyperimmune sera to HTLV-III. As you know, there is substantial
cross-reaction as anticipated" (7/3/84 Gallo-to-Montagnier letter; p. 1).

Dr. Sarngadharan brought lysate of the IP virus back with him to Bethesda; in early June, he.sed the lysate to perform both Western blot and homologous competition assays. The latter
-, i ii1i-,p 3 t -:_..J-__.U - -= _._....I..........l............................

5 of 31

1/9/98 9:26 AM