Challenges and Opportunities
4.5 CURRENT CHALLENGES IN EARLY DRUG DISCOVERY .1 Setbacks in Identification and Selection of New Targets
4.5.4 Effect of Size and Capability
Bio/pharmaceutical organizations of different capacities engage in discov- ery and development of therapeutic agents. Company size and financial power influences the number of targets pursued. For example, a start-up or biotech might be working on four targets while a multinational pharma- ceutical company might be working on 40 targets, which, intuitively, will require a higher research investment and which in turn, increases the prob- ability of success. This is why the biotech or small pharmaceutical compa- nies grapple with lack of funding or reach operational hiatus, prompting an exhaustive search for alternative means of company survival. Thus, time and capital are of a paramount value and these important elements have a major impact on the prospect for functional breakthrough.
REFERENCES
[1] Collins FS, Morgan M, Patrinos A. The human genome project: lessons from large-scale biology. Science 2003;300:286–90.
[2] Battelle Technology Partnership Practice, Economic Impact of the Human Genome Project [Internet]; 2011. Available from: http://www.battelle.org/publications/hu- mangenomeproject.pdf [accessed 06.01.2015].
[3] Drews J. Drug discovery: a historical perspective. Science 2000;287:1960–4.
[4] Yeh R, Lim LP, Burge CB. Computational inference of homologous gene structures in the human genome. Genome Res 2001;11(5):803–16.
[5] Paolini GV, Shapland RH, Van Hoorn WP, Mason JS, Hopkins AL. Global mapping of pharmacological space. Nat Biotechnol 2006;24:805–15.
[6] Hopkins AL. Network pharmacology: the next paradigm in drug discovery. Nat Chem Biol 2008;4:682–90.
[7] Metz JT, Hajduk PJ. Rational approaches to targeted polypharmacology: creat- ing and navigating protein-ligand interaction networks. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2010;14:498–504.
[8] Barabási AL. The network takeover. Nat Phys 2012;8:14–6.
[9] Schadt EE. Molecular networks as sensors and drivers of common human diseases.
Nature 2009;461:218–23.
[10] Available from: https://openinnovation.lilly.com/
[11] Swinney DC, Anthony J. How were medicines discovered? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2011;10:507–19.
[12] Kell DB. Genotype: phenotype mapping: genes as computer programs. Trends Genet 2002;18:555–9.
[13] Zheng W, Natasha Thorne N, McKew JC. Phenotypic screens as a renewed approach for drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 2013;18(21–22):1067–73.
[14] Lee JA, Berg EL. Neoclassic drug discovery: the case for lead generation using pheno- typic and functional approaches. J Biomol Screen 2013;18(10):1143–55.
[15] Available from: http://www.pd2.lilly.com
[16] Available from: http://www.ncats.nih.gov/research/rare-diseases/trnd/trnd.html [17] Barabási AL, Gulbahce N, Loscalzo J. Network medicine: a network-based approach to
human disease. Nat Rev Genet 2011;12:56–68.
[18] Silverman EK, Loscalzo J. Network medicine approaches to the genetics of complex diseases. Discov Med 2012;14:143–52.
[19] Hood L, Perlmutter RM. The impact of systems approaches on biological problems in drug discovery. Nat Biotechnol 2004;22:1215–7.
[20] Butcher EC, Berg EL, Kunkel EJ. Systems biology in drug discovery. Nat Biotechnol 2004;22:1253–9.
[21] Weston AD, Hood L. Systems biology, proteomics, and the future of health care:
toward predictive, preventative, and personalized medicine. J Proteome Res 2004;3:179–96.
[22] Kohl P, Noble D. Systems biology and the virtual physiological human. Mol Syst Biol 2009;5:292.
[23] Rosenwald A, Wright G, Chan WC, Connors JM, Campo E, Rosenwald A, Wright G, Chan WC, Connors JM, Campo E, Fisher RI, Gascoyne RD, Muller- Hermelink HK, Smeland EB, Giltnane JM, Hurt EM, Zhao H, Averett L, Yang L, Wilson WH, Jaffe ES, Simon R, Klausner RD, Powell J, Duffey PL, Longo DL, Greiner TC, Weisenburger DD, Sanger WG, Dave BJ, Lynch JC, Vose J, Armitage JO, Montserrat E, López-Guillermo A, Grogan TM, Miller TP, LeBlanc M, Ott G, Kvaloy S, Delabie J, Holte H, Krajci P, Stokke T, Staudt LM. The use of molecular profiling to pre- dict survival after chemotherapy for diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1937–47.
Social Aspects of Drug Discovery, Development and Commercialization 106
[24] Phillip CJ, Giardina CK, Bilir B, Cutler DJ, Lai Y, Kucuk O, Moreno CS. Genistein cooperates with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat to induce cell death in prostate cancer cells. BMC Cancer 2012;12:145.
[25] Available from: http://metabolomics.se/Images/Research/Sy
[26] Barabási AL, Gulbahce N, Loscalzo J. Network medicine: a network-based approach to human disease. Nat Rev Genet 2011;12:56–68.
[27] Ideker T, Krogan NJ. Differential network biology. Mol Syst Biol 2012;8(565):1–9.
[28] Isserlin R, Emili A. Nine steps to proteomic wisdom: a practical guide to using protein- protein interaction networks and molecular pathways as a framework for interpreting disease proteomic profiles. Proteomics Clin Appl 2007;1(9):1156–68.
[29] Li J, Zhu XY, Chen JY. Building disease-specific drug-protein connectivity maps from molecular interaction networks and PubMed abstracts. PLoS Comput Biol 2009;5(7):1–15.
[30] Margineanu DG. Systems biology impact on antiepileptic drug discovery. Epilepsy Res 2012;98(2–3):104–15.
[31] Zhao ZM, Kier LB, Buck GA. Systems biology: molecular networks and disease. Chem Biodivers 2012;9(5):841–7.
[32] Schlage WK, Westra JW, Gebel S, Catlett NL, Mathis C, Frushour BP, Hengstermann A, Hooser AV, Poussin C, Wong B, Lietz M, Park J, Drubin D, Veljkovic E, Peitsch MC, Hoeng J, Deehan R. A compatible cellular stress network model for non-diseased pul- monary and cardiovascular tissue. BMC Syst Biol 2011;5:168.
[33] Hu X, Zhao D, Strotmann A. Mapping molecular association networks of nervous sys- tem diseases via large-scale analysis of published research. PLoS One 2013;8(6):e67121.
[34] Suthram S, Dudley JT, Chiang AP, Chen R, Hastie TJ, Butte AJ. Network-based eluci- dation of human disease similarities reveals common functional modules enriched for pluripotent drug targets. PLoS Comput Biol 2010;6(2):e1000662.
[35] Visscher PM, Brown MA, McCarthy MI, Yang J. Five years of GWAS discovery. Am J Hum Genet 2012;90:7–24.
[36] Campillos M, Kuhn M, Gavin AC, Jensen LJ, Bork P. Drug target identification using side-effect similarity. Science 2008;321(5886):263–6.
[37] National Human Genome Research Institute – a catalog of published genome-wide association studies. Available from: http://www.genome.gov/gwastudies
[38] The Pharmacogenomics Knowledge Base. Literature analysis by R. Ranganathan and C. Woods. Available from: http://www.pharmgkb.org
[39] Manolio TA. Genome wide association studies and assessment of the risk of disease. N Engl J Med 2010;363(2):166–76.
[40] Merino A, Bronowska AK, Jackson DB, Cahill DJ. Drug profiling: knowing where it hits. Drug Discov Today 2010;15(17-18):749–56.
[41] Berman J, Haffajee CI, Alpert JS. Therapy of symptomatic pericarditis after myocardial infarction: retrospective and prospective studies of aspirin, indomethacin, prednisone, and spontaneous resolution. Am Heart J 1981;101(6):750–3.
[42] Durongpisitkul K, Gururaj VJ, Park JM, Martin CF. The prevention of coronary artery aneurysm in Kawasaki disease: a meta-analysis on the efficacy of aspirin and immuno- globulin treatment. Pediatrics 1995;96(6):1057–61.
[43] Grundmann K, Jaschonek K, Kleine B, Dichgans J, Topka H. Aspirin non-responder status in patients with recurrent cerebral ischemic attacks. J Neurol 2003;250(1):63–6.
[44] Amory JK, Amory DW. Dosing frequency of aspirin and prevention of heart attacks and strokes. Am J Med 2007;120(4):e5.
[45] Daya S. Recurrent spontaneous early pregnancy loss and low dose aspirin. Minerva Ginecol 2003;55(5):441–9.
[46] Baron JA. Aspirin and cancer: trials and observational studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;.
djs338.
[47] Schmid A, Blank LM. Hypothesis-driven omics integration. Nat Chem Biol 2010;6(7):485–7.
[48] Joyce AR, Palsson BO. The model organism as a system: integrating “omics” data sets.
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2006;7(3):198–210.
[49] Boran ADW, Iyengar R. Systems approaches to polypharmacology and drug discovery.
Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 2010;13(3):297–309.
[50] Oprea TI, Nielsen SK, Ursu O, Yang JJ, Taboureau O, Mathias SL, Kouskoumvekaki L, Sklar LA, Bologa CG. Associating drugs, targets and clinical outcomes into an integrated network affords a new platform for computer-aided drug repurposing. Mol Inform 2011;30(2-3):100–11.
[51] Achenbach J, Tiikkainen P, Franke L, Proschak E. Computational tools for polypharma- cology and repurposing. Future Med Chem 2011;3(8):961–8.
[52] Paolini GV, Shapland RH, van Hoorn WP, Mason JS, Hopkins AL. Global mapping of pharmacological space. Nat Biotechnol 2006;24:805–15.
[53] Reddy SA, Shuxing Z. Polypharmacology: drug discovery for the future. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol 2013;6(1):10.
[54] Auffray C, Chen Z, Hood L. Systems medicine: the future of medical genomics and healthcare. Genome Med 2009;1(2):90. Capobianco E. Ten challenges for systems med- icine. Front Genet 2012;3:193.
[55] Hood L, Flores M. A personal view on systems medicine and the emergence of proac- tive P4 medicine: predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory. New Biotech- nol 2012;29:613–24.
[56] Mardinoglu A, Nielsen J. Systems medicine and metabolic modelling. J Intern Med 2012;271:142–54.
[57] Wolkenhauer O, Auffray C, Jaster R, Steinhoff G, Dammann O. The road from systems biology to systems medicine. Pediatr Res 2013;73:502–7.
[58] Zhao S, Iyengar R. Systems pharmacology: network analysis to identify multiscale mechanisms of drug action. Ann Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2012;52(52):505–21.
[59] Boran AD, Iyengar R. Systems approaches to polypharmacology and drug discovery.
Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 2010;13(3):297–309.
[60] Dar A, Das T, Shokat K, Cagan R. Chemical genetic discovery of targets and anti-targets for cancer polypharmacology. Nature 2012;486(7401):80–4.
[61] Boran AD, Iyengar R. Systems pharmacology. Mount Sinai J Med 2010;77(4):333–44.
[62] Xie L, Xie L, Kinnings SL, Bourne PE. Novel computational approaches to polyphar- macology as a means to define responses to individual drugs. Ann Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2012;52(52):361.
[63] Lounkine E, Keiser MJ, Whitebread S, Mikhailov D, Hamon J, Jenkins JL, Lavan P, We- ber E, Doak K, Côté S, Shoichet BK, Urban L. Large-scale prediction and testing of drug activity on side-effect targets. Nature 2012;486(7403):361–7.
[64] Allison M. NCATS launches drug repurposing program. Nat Biotechnol 2012;30(7):571–2.
[65] Tian Q, Stepaniants SB, Mao M, Weng L, Feetham MC, Doyle MJ, Yi EC, Dai H, Thors- son V, Eng J, Goodlett D, Berger JP, Gunter B, Linseley PS, Stoughton RB, Aebersold R, Collins SJ, Hanlon WA, Hood LE. Integrated genomic and proteomic analyses of gene expression in mammalian cells. Mol Cell Proteomics 2004;3:960–9.
[66] Szallasi Z. Genetic network analysis in light of massively parallel biological data acquisi- tion. Pac Symp Biocomput 1999;5–16.
[67] Swinney DC, Anthony J. How were new medicines discovered? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2011;10:507–19.
[68] Paul SM, Mytelka DS, Dunwiddie CT, Persinger CC, Munos BH, Lindborg SR, Schacht AL. How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry’s grand challenge. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2010;9:203–14.
Social Aspects of Drug Discovery, Development and Commercialization 108
[69] Andersen MR, et al. Trends in the exploitation of novel drug targets. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2011;10:579–90.
[70] Knowles J, Gromo G. Target selection in drug discovery. Nat Rev 2003;2(1):63–9.
[71] Pammolli F, Magazzini L, Riccaboni M. The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D.
Nat Drug Discov 2011;10:428–38.
[72] The USP Dictionary of USAN and International Drug Names. US Pharmacopeial Convention; 2010.
Social Aspects of Drug Discovery, Development and Commercialization Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802220-7.00005-3 All rights reserved. 109