Current
Topics in Medicinal Chemistry
ISSN: 1568-0266

Current Topics
in Medicinal Chemistry
Volume 5, Number 11, 2005
Contents
De-risking the Discovery and Development of New Drugs
from Bench to Clinic
Guest Editor: Sergey Ilyin

Editorial Pp.1031
Strategy of Utilizing In Vitro and In
Vivo ADME Tools for
Lead Optimization and Drug Candidate Selection Pp.1033
Suresh K. Balani, Gerald T. Miwa, Liang-Shang Gan, Jing-Tao
Wu and Frank W. Lee
[Abstract]
Pharmacogenomics: Integration into Drug Discovery
and Development Pp.1039
Keith Johnson, John Thompson and Aidan Power
[Abstract]
Synergistic Approaches to Clinical Oncology Biomarker
Discovery Pp.1047
Stanley M. Belkowski, Deborah Polkovitch and Michael R.
D’Andrea
[Abstract]
Positron Emission Tomography: Applications in Drug
Discovery and Drug Development Pp.1053
Jingli Wang and Laura Maurer
[Abstract]
Is There a Placebo Problem in Antidepressant Trials?
Pp.1077
Huaiyu Yang, Cristina Cusin and Maurizio Fava
[Abstract]
Risk Reduction in Drug Discovery and Development
Pp.1087
Martin Mackay, Stephen D.A. Street and John M. McCall
[Abstract]
Abstracts
[Back to top]
Editorial
De-Risking the Discovery and Development of New Drugs
from Bench to Clinic
The biopharmaceutical industry is facing challenges from
increased generic competition, regulatory changes and other
factors negatively impacting pharma economics. Industry is
also presented with opportunities for improving overall research
& development and business efficiency via de-risking development
of novel drug candidates. Approaches to improve efficiency
and decrease risk include in vitro and in vivo ADME (absorption,
distribution, metabolism and excretion), biomarker-enabled
development strategies, intelligent clinical trial design
and overall risk management. ADME strategies to select and
optimize drug candidates can significantly reduce PK-based
failures in clinical trials, and more successfully predict
drug-drug interaction potentials in the clinic. ADME strategies
are reviewed in this issue by Balani et al. (Millenium Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.). Biomarker approaches can facilitate transition between
discovery, experimental medicine and full development and
in some cases be a part of post-marketing activities. Biomarker
methodologies include genomics, pharmacogenomics, proteomics,
integrative strategies and molecular imaging. Pharmacogenomics
and its role in discovery and development are discussed by
Johnson et al. from Pfizer Global Research and Development.
Integrative strategies, such as Functional Informatics, could
incorporate several different technologies to cross validate
findings. Genomics, proteomics and integrative strategies
as they can be applied to clinical oncology biomarker discovery
are reviewed by Belkowski and colleagues from the Johnson
& Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, L.L.C.
Noninvasive techniques are generally based on imaging modalities
and include light imaging, CT, MRI, PET as well as different
combinations of these modalities, for example PET/CT. Although
all of these technologies can facilitate preclinical and clinical
activities, it is beyond this issue to cover them in detail.
PET provides an opportunity to non-invasively evaluate in
vivo PK, receptor occupancy and pharmacodynamics (PD), and
PK/PD, and could lead to a better prediction of dosing to
be used in the clinic as well as to a reduction in the cost
and duration of phase II clinical trials. It could also provide
information to enhance our understanding of the mechanism(s)
of action. PET technology provides an ability to complement
with assays of therapeutic efficacy and potential adverse
events. In diseases that are difficult to approach with traditional
methods, PET will accelerate and improve compound development.
PET technology is reviewed in this issue by Wang and Maurer
from the Alza Corporation. Selection of the right dosing is
of paramount importance for informed go/no go decision in
clinical development. Of equal importance is a well-conceived
overall design of a clinical study. This is of particular
importance to trials with high placebo response rate and Yang,
Cusin, and Fava from the Depression Clinical and Research
Program at the Massachusetts General Hospital discuss various
strategies to address this problem in antidepressant trials.
Finally, Martin Mackay and his co-authors from Pfizer talk
about overall strategies (technology, organizational, etc.)
to handle risk in drug discovery and development. This issue
is comprised of well referenced up-to-date edited manuscripts
from leaders in the pharmaceutical industry and academia.
Sergey E. Ilyin, Ph.D
.Bioinformatics / Translational Technology Group Leader
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research
& Development, L.L.C.
Welsh and McKean Rds
PO Box 776
Spring House, PA 19477-0776
USA
[Back to top]
Strategy of Utilizing In Vitro and In
Vivo ADME Tools for
Lead Optimization and Drug Candidate Selection
Suresh K. Balani, Gerald T. Miwa, Liang-Shang
Gan, Jing-Tao Wu and Frank W. Lee
The high-throughput screening in drug discovery for absorption,
distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME) properties has
become the norm in the industry. Only a few years ago it was
ADME properties that were attributed to more failure of drugs
than efficacy or safety in the clinic trials. With the realization
of new techniques and refinement of existing techniques better
projections for the pharmacokinetic properties of compounds
in humans are being made, shifting the drug failure attributes
more to the safety and efficacy properties of drug candidates.
There are a tremendous number of tools available to discovery
scientists to screen compounds for optimization of ADME properties
and selection of better candidates. However, the use of these
tools has generally been to characterize these compounds rather
than to select among them. This report discusses applications
of the available ADME tools to better understand the clinical
implication of these properties, and to optimize these properties.
It also provides tracts for timing of studies with respect
to the stage of the compound during discovery, by means of
a discovery assay by stage (DABS) paradigm. The DABS provide
the team with a rationale for the types of studies to be done
during hit-to-lead, early and late lead optimization stages
of discovery, as well as outlining the deliverables (objectives)
at those stages. DABS has proven to be optimal for efficient
utilization of resources and helped the discovery team to
track the progress of compounds and projects.
[Back to top]
Pharmacogenomics: Integration into Drug Discovery
and Development
Keith Johnson, John Thompson and Aidan Power
To deliver on the promise of personalized medicine requires
the integration of pharmacogenomics into the discovery and
development of medicines. Over the last few years the pharmaceutical
industry has been building considerable resources to achieve
that. However, this requires new skill sets, capabilities
and infrastructures which have not been a traditional part
of the industry’s efforts. In this article we describe
how the integration of genetics and pharmacogenomics data
has begun to deliver success and illustrate the challenges
that the new science and technologies bring and how these
challenges can be addressed in order to deliver on the promise.
[Back to top]
Synergistic Approaches to Clinical Oncology
Biomarker Discovery
Stanley M. Belkowski, Deborah Polkovitch and Michael R.
D’Andrea
Biomarkers in the clinical oncology field can have tremendous
therapeutic impact especially if the marker is detected before
clinical symptoms. This impact can be extended to the evaluation
of clinical oncology treatments allowing evaluation of potential
compounds to determine their efficacy in the disease treatment.
The discovery of clinical biomarkers can consume time, resources
and costs. Therefore, it is important that the most effective
strategies are employed to discover these biomarkers. These
strategies may include the integration of available genomic,
proteomic and histopathological technologies, which could
reduce the costs and aid in the validation of the biomarker.
Certainly the type of biomarker needed to address a particularly
defined problem will drive the type of technology. However,
a single biomarker to diagnose a specific cancer can be as
elusive as relying on a single technology. This review examines
some of the technologies used to discover biomarkers and presents
the use of combinatorial technical synergies to discover and
validate potential clinical oncology biomarkers.
[Back to top]
Positron Emission Tomography: Applications in Drug
Discovery and Drug Development
Jingli Wang and Laura Maurer
Positron Emission Tomography (PET) is a sophisticated nuclear
imaging modality that affords researchers the ability to conduct
both functional and molecular imaging on biological and biochemical
processes in vivo. In functional imaging, biological parameters
such as metabolic rate and perfusion that can be altered by
disease or treatment are monitored. In molecular imaging,
PET can be used to examine and quantify cellular events such
as cell trafficking, receptor binding and gene expression.
Therefore, PET is an important tool to elucidate mechanisms
associated with diseases and drug actions. In addition to
PET, microPET is designed to image small animals. A great
tool to facilitate preclinical studies and basic research,
it can eliminate the need of sacrificing the animal by enabling
noninvasive, longitudinal, and serial studies. The results
from preclinical studies using microPET can be directly correlated
with clinical studies using PET, thus bridging the chasm that
used to separate the 2 pivotal phases in drug development.
This review first describes the basic principles of PET and
compares it to other imaging modalities. Then, PET procedures
and PET isotopes and tracers synthesis are outlined. Next,
functional and molecular PET imaging applications in the fields
of oncology, neurology, and cardiology in both humans and
animals are presented. Spanning a wide range, these applications
demonstrate the versatility of PET and how it can be used
to accelerate drug discovery and development. Finally, the
advantages and limitations of PET and how it can be used in
the future to minimize risks of drug development are discussed.
[Back to top]
Is There a Placebo Problem in Antidepressant Trials?
Huaiyu Yang, Cristina Cusin and Maurizio Fava
In psychiatry, particularly in antidepressant clinical studies,
placebo-controlled trials often yield results that are very
difficult to interpret because of robust placebo responses.
Meta-analyses of trials in major depressive disorder (MDD)
suggest that drug-placebo differences in response rates range
from 11% to 18%. However, in trials of marketed antidepressants
present in the FDA databases, antidepressant drugs were superior
to placebo in only 45 out of 93 RCTs (48%), and the placebo
response overall appears to have increased over time. This
gradual increase in placebo response rates may lead to delays
in bringing new antidepressant treatments to the market, increased
costs of antidepressant drug development and, in some cases,
decisions to stop the development of certain compounds, or
FDA decisions to not approve new treatments. A number of possible
contributing factors to this significant placebo response
in MDD have been identified, but further studies are needed.
Many of the remedies used by researchers to minimize the placebo
response, such as lead-in periods or shortening the duration
of study visits, have failed to show consistent benefits.
From our analysis of published studies, it appears that expectations
about the speed of response may be shaped by the duration
of the trial and that most of the placebo response occurs
in the first half of the trial, regardless of its duration.
These observations have led us to develop a novel approach
to the placebo response problem called the Sequential Parallel
Comparison Design.
[Back to top]
Risk Reduction in Drug Discovery and Development
Martin Mackay, Stephen D.A. Street and John M. McCall
The ever increasing cost of discovery and development of
new pharmaceutical agents mandates that risk be managed more
aggressively. Decisions that are based on data, well-understood
experience, and the value of the project itself must be made
sooner in the overall process. Uncontrolled risk must be addressed
and managed. The reward system within pharma must treat negative
decisions as productive and important. Clearly, risk must
be addressed concertedly at the technical, strategic, and
organizational levels. This is not an option. When we do our
job well in discovery and early development, a compound's
chances in the clinic, the regulatory area, and the market
will all be better.
|