Open access could transform drug discovery: A case study of JQ1

Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 321-332

  Arshad, Zeeshaan ^a,b   Smith, James ^c,d   Roberts, Mackenna ^d   Lee, Wen Hwa ^a   Davies, Ben ^c,d   Bure, Kim ^e   Hollander, Georg A ^d,f   Dopson, Sue ^g   Bountra, Chas ^a   Brindley, David ^c,d,g,h,i,j  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^e SARTORIUS STEDIM BIOTECH GMBH   (Germany)

^f UNIVERSITY CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (Switzerland)

^g UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^h UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ HARVARD STEM CELL INSTITUTE   (United States)

^j USCF Stanford Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI)   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Bromodomain; Drug Discovery; Epigenetics; Healthcare Translation; JQ1; Open Access; Open Innovation; SGC (Structural Genomics Consortium)

Indexed keywords

2 ALLYL 1 [6 (1 HYDROXY 1 METHYLETHYL) 2 PYRIDINYL] 6 [4 (4 METHYL 1 PIPERAZINYL)ANILINO] 1H PYRAZOLO[3,4 D]PYRIMIDIN 3(2H) ONE; 4 (4 CHLOROPHENYL) 2,3,9 TRIMETHYL 6H THIENO[3,2 F][1,2,4]TRIAZOLO[4,3 A][1,4]DIAZEPINE 6 ACETIC ACID TERT BUTYL ESTER; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CHEMICAL COMPOUND; ENZYME INHIBITOR; HISTONE DEMETHYLASE; IMATINIB; NEW DRUG; PRI 724; PRI 725; PROTEIN; PROTEIN BRD4; SELUMETINIB; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; (+)-JQ1 COMPOUND; AZEPINE DERIVATIVE; TRIAZOLE DERIVATIVE;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; CASE STUDY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COST; DEGENERATIVE DISEASE; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG SYNTHESIS; DRUG TARGETING; EPIGENETICS; HUMAN; PATENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; WEB OF SCIENCE; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; ECONOMIC MODEL; ECONOMICS; MOLECULARLY TARGETED THERAPY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES; TIME FACTOR;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; AZEPINES; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG DISCOVERY; DRUG INDUSTRY; HUMANS; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY; MODELS, ECONOMIC; MOLECULAR TARGETED THERAPY; PATENTS AS TOPIC; TIME FACTORS; TRIAZOLES;

EID: 84958547156     PISSN: 17460441     EISSN: 1746045X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1517/17460441.2016.1144587     Document Type: Review

References (57)

1. Kessel M. The problems with today's pharmaceutical business-an outsider's view. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29:27-33.
2. Staff NP, Runge BK, Windebank AJ. Breaking down translation barriers: investigator's perspective. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:252.
3. Scannell JW, Blanckley A, Boldon H, et al. Diagnosing the decline in pharmaceutical R&D efficiency. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012;11:191-200.
4. Rawlins MD. Cutting the cost of drug development? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2004;3:360-364.
5. Wells JR, Raabe AR. Pharmaceutical industry in 2005: case study. Harv Buisniness Rev. 2005.
6. A review of UK health research funding. London: The stationary Office, 2006.
7. Fernandez J-M, Stein RM, Lo AW. Commercializing biomedical research through securitization techniques. Nat Biotechnol. 2012;30:964-975.
8. Cockburn IM. The changing structure of the pharmaceutical industry. Health Aff. 2004;23:10-22.
9. Hunter J, Stephens S. Is open innovation the way forward for big pharma? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010;9:87-88.
10. Novel New Drugs Summary. Silver Spring(MD): FDA; 2015.
11. Paul SM, Mytelka DS, Dunwiddie CT, et al. How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry's grand challenge. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010; 9:203-214.
12. Munos B. Lessons from 60 years of pharmaceutical innovation. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2009;8:959-968.
13. LaMattina JL. The impact of mergers on pharmaceutical R&D. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011;10:559-560.
14. Evaluate Ltd. EvaluatePharma alpha world preview. Evaluate Pharma. 2014:3.
15. Brindley D, Reeve B, Mason C. Pharmaceutical industry: investors unfazed by drug-patent expiry. Nature. 2012;481:265.
16. Harrison C. Patent watch: the patent cliff steepens. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011;10:12-13.
17. Abboud C, Berman E, Cohen A, et al. The price of drugs for chronic myeloid leukemia(CML) is a reflection of the unsustainable prices of cancer drugs: from the perspective of a large group of CML experts. Blood. 2013; 121:4439-4442.
18. Knapp S, Sundström M. Recently targeted kinases and their inhibitors-the path to clinical trials. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2014;17:58-63.
19. Emmons W, O'Regan J, Brand M. Note on pharmaceutical industry regulation. Case study. Harv Buisniess Rev. 1991:10.
20. Lasagna L. The development and regulation of new medications. Science. 1978;200:871-873.
21. Ward MR. Drug approval overregaultion. Regulation. 1992;15:47.
22. Kim JH, Scialli AR. Thalidomide: the tragedy of birth defects and the effective treatment of disease. Toxicol Sci. 2011;122:1-6.
23. Greene JA, Podolsky SH. Reform, regulation, and pharmaceuticals - the Kefauver-Harris Amendments at 50. New England J Med. 2012;367:1481-1483.
24. Waring MJ, Arrowsmith J, Leach AR, et al. An analysis of the attrition of drug candidates from four major pharmaceutical companies. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2015;14:475-486.
25. Kola I, Landis J. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2004;3:711-715.
26. Bunnage ME. Getting pharmaceutical R&D back on target. Nat Chem Biol. 2011;7:335-339.
27. Gregori-Puigjané E, Setola V, Hert J, et al. Identifying mechanism-of-action targets for drugs and probes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:11178-11183.
28. Bowes J, Brown AJ, Hamon J, et al. Reducing safetyrelated drug attrition: the use of in vitro pharmacological profiling. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012;11:909-922.
29. Edwards AM, Bountra C, Kerr DJ, et al. Open access chemical and clinical probes to support drug discovery. Nat Chem Biol. 2009;5:436-440.
30. Munos BH, Chin WW. How to revive breakthrough innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3:89.
31. Corbett A, Pickett J, Burns A, et al. Drug repositioning for Alzheimer's disease. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012; 11:833-846.
32. Anand R. Barriers to Alzheimer disease drug discovery and drug development in the pharmaceutical industry. Alzheimer Dis Associated Disord. 2002; 16:S33-39.
33. Robinson DM, Keating GM. Memantine. Drugs. 2012;66(15):15-34.
34. Cummings JL, Morstorf T, Zhong K. Alzheimer's disease drug-development pipeline: few candidates, frequent failures. Alzheimer's Res Ther. 2014;6:37.
35. Brookmeyer R, Gray S, Kawas C. Projections of Alzheimer's disease in the United States and the public health impact of delaying disease onset. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:1337-1342.
36. Munos B. Can open-source R&D reinvigorate drug research? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006;5:723-729.
37. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. Harnessing open innovation. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2009;8:344-345.
38. Dahlander L, Gann DM. How open is innovation? Res Policy. 2010;39:699-709.
39. Chesbrough H, Crowther AK. Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R and D Management. 2006;36:229-236.
40. Chesbrough HW. Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 2003.
41. Filippakopoulos P, Qi J, Picaud S, et al. Selective inhibition of BET bromodomains. Nature. 2010;468:1067-1073.
42. Cohen FJ. Macro trends in pharmaceutical innovation. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2005;4:78-84.
43. Quigley A, Dong YY, Pike ACW, et al. The structural basis of ZMPSTE24-dependent laminopathies. Science. 2013;339:1604-1607.
44. Kruidenier L, Chung C-W, Cheng Z, et al. A selective jumonji H3K27 demethylase inhibitor modulates the proinflammatory macrophage response. Nature. 2012;488:404-408.
45. Lambert GK, Duhme-Klair A-K, Morgan T, et al. The background, discovery and clinical development of BCR-ABL inhibitors. Drug Discov Today. 2013;18:992-1000.
46. Manley PW, Cowan-Jacob SW, Buchdunger E, et al. Imatinib: a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38:19-27.
47. Capdeville R, Buchdunger E, Zimmermann J, et al. Glivec(STI571, imatinib), a rationally developed, targeted anticancer drug. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2002;1:493-502.
48. Din OS, Woll PJ. Treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor: focus on imatinib mesylate. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008;4:149-162.
49. Chesbrough H. The logic of open innovation: managing intellectual property. Calif Manage Rev. 2003;45:33-58.
50. Warcoin J. Intellectual property. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2008;7:369-69.
51. Heller MA, Eisenberg RS. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science. 1998;280:698-701.
52. Chesbrough H, Garman AR. How open innovation can help you cope in lean times. Harv Bus Rev. 2009.
53. Roberts M, Wall IB, Bingham I, et al. The global intellectual property landscape of induced pluripotent stem cell technologies. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32:742-748.
54. Lee WH. Open access target validation is a more efficient way to accelerate drug discovery. PLoS Biol. 2015;13: e1002164.
55. Murray CJL, Rosenfeld LC, Lim SS, et al. Global malaria mortality between 1980 and 2010: a systematic analysis. Lancet. 2012;379:413-431.
56. Maude RJ, Pontavornpinyo W, Saralamba S, et al. The last man standing is the most resistant: eliminating artemisinin-resistant malaria in Cambodia. Malar J. 2009;8:31.
57. Spangenberg T, Burrows JN, Kowalczyk P, et al. The open access malaria box: a drug discovery catalyst for neglected diseases. PLoS One. 2013;8:e0062906.