Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25685324›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2014

Collaboration for rare disease drug discovery research.

Nadia K Litterman, Michele Rhee, David C Swinney, Sean Ekins

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Advancing orphan drug development for rare diseases.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2024
    Article
  4. 'Advocacy groups are the connectors': Experiences and contributions of rare disease patient organization leaders in advanced neurotherapeutics.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Nadia K LittermanCollaborative Drug Discovery, Inc., Burlingame, CA, 94010, USA.
Michele RheeNational Brain Tumor Society, Newton, MA, 02458, USA.
David C SwinneyInstitute for Rare and Neglected Diseases Drug Discovery (iRND3), Mountain View, CA, 94043, USA.
Sean EkinsCollaborative Drug Discovery, Inc., Burlingame, CA, 94010, USA ; Collaborations in Chemistry, Fuquay Varina, NC, 27526, USA ; Phoenix Nest Inc., Brooklyn, NY, 11215, USA ; Hereditary Neuropathy Foundation, New York, NY, 10016, USA ; Hannah's Hope Fund, Rexford, NY, NY 12148, USA.
Collaborative Drug Discovery (United States) · USHereditary Disease Foundation · USInstitute for Rare and Neglected Diseases Drug Discovery · USNational Brain Tumor Society · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rare disease research has reached a tipping point, with the confluence of scientific and technologic developments that if appropriately harnessed, could lead to key breakthroughs and treatments for this set of devastating disorders. Industry-wide trends have revealed that the traditional drug discovery research and development (R&D) model is no longer viable, and drug companies are evolving their approach. Rather than only pursue blockbuster therapeutics for heterogeneous, common diseases, drug companies have increasingly begun to shift their focus to rare diseases. In academia, advances in genetics analyses and disease mechanisms have allowed scientific understanding to mature, but the lack of funding and translational capability severely limits the rare disease research that leads to clinical trials. Simultaneously, there is a movement towards increased research collaboration, more data sharing, and heightened engagement and active involvement by patients, advocates, and foundations. The growth in networks and social networking tools presents an opportunity to help reach other patients but also find researchers and build collaborations. The growth of collaborative software that can enable researchers to share their data could also enable rare disease patients and foundations to manage their portfolio of funded projects for developing new therapeutics and suggest drug repurposing opportunities. Still there are many thousands of diseases without treatments and with only fragmented research efforts. We will describe some recent progress in several rare diseases used as examples and propose how collaborations could be facilitated. We propose that the development of a center of excellence that integrates and shares informatics resources for rare diseases sponsored by all of the stakeholders would help foster these initiatives.

Indexed as

drug discoverypatient advocacyrare diseaseTwitter

Identifiers

PMID25685324
PMCPMC4314660
OpenAlexW2061931124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.