Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15717016›Full record

ReviewNeuroRx : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics2004

Strategic challenges in neurotherapeutic pharmaceutical development.

Christopher C Gallen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NeuroRx : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Expression of Cell-Adhesion Molecules inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Christopher C GallenClinical Research and Development, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Collegeville, Pennsylvania 19426, USA. gallenc@wyeth.com

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Developing new therapeutics presents formidable economic, scientific, and medical challenges that are exacerbated by special factors in neurotherapeutics development, e.g., the complexity of the CNS with its attendant need to sometimes affect multiple pathways, the lack of clarity of disease etiology, inadequacy of available animal models, and difficulties in defining disease populations and quantifying treatment response. This paper reviews the economic challenges faced by therapeutics developers in general and neurotherapeutics developers in particular. It discusses key scientific challenges, particularly those pertinent to neurotherapeutics development, as a background to proposing a different industrial strategy to drive future therapeutics development. This Biodesign strategy potentially surpasses previous paradigms by incorporating elements such as the use of disease modeling to select better targets and potential therapies, information science-based approaches to enhance small molecule chemistry, exploitation of the potential for biological technologies to rapidly generate mechanistic probes, and development of improved approaches for using animal models and studying human molecules mechanistically and biologically. Synergistic use of these elements can change the overall business model of companies engaged in neurotherapeutics development. The Biodesign paradigm has the potential to both markedly enhance the development of new therapies and to address some of the economic challenges facing healthcare systems and therapeutics developers alike.

Indexed as

Drug DesignTechnology, PharmaceuticalAnimalsCentral Nervous SystemCentral Nervous System DiseasesDisease Models, AnimalHumansModels, Neurological

Identifiers

PMID15717016
PMCPMC534921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.