Yesterday, I made a post concerning big pharma cutting back its investment in many areas of neuroscience due to the higher risk presented in this therapeutic area and the high costs associated with it. It was also pointed out that much of the difficulty lies with there not being many good biomarkers and model systems to work in.
Today I see a post In the Pipeline that describes a development funding opportunity being presented by NIH in the neuroscience arena:
The NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research is establishing a ‘virtual pharma’ network of contract service providers and consultants and is soliciting applications for U01 cooperative agreement awards from investigators with small molecule compounds that could be developed into clinical candidates within this network. This program intends to develop drugs from medicinal chemistry optimization through Phase I clinical testing and facilitate industry partnerships for their subsequent development. By initiating development of up to 20 new small-molecule compounds over two years (seven projects were launched in 2011), we anticipate that approximately four compounds will enter Phase 1 clinical trials within this program.
There you have it. The NIH is trying to assemble the resources (in a virtual network) and provide the funding encouragment to develop new therapies for neuro diseases. And, they appear to be serious in seeking results:
Applicants must have available small-molecule compounds with strong evidence of disease-related activity and the potential for optimization through iterative medicinal chemistry. Applicants must also be able to conduct bioactivity and efficacy testing to assess compounds synthesized in the development process and provide all pre-clinical validation for the desired disease indication. . .This initiative is not intended to support development of new bioactivity assays, thus the applicant must have in hand well-characterized assays and models.
The goal is to develop at least one novel and effective drug for a nervous system disorder that is currently poorly treated and to catalyze industry interest in novel disease targets. Not everyone is loathe to pick up the challenge of developing new neuro drugs.
Posted by Bruce Lehr March 29th 2011.
i am currently taking a drug that has some neuroprotective qualities but has other bad side effects and detriments. The quest in neuroscience, I believe is to produce therapies that can address a broad range of diseases and potentially treat a larger segment of population suffering from undiagnosed, unsolicitated deficiences in neuroprotective arena. The theory is that society as a whole can benefit from treatments that are holistic and that benefit humanity in quality of life and productivity. Why are they only treating the diseases that make headlines, i see alot of people suffering who don't dare speak up and take low quality of life, as something to be endured. Neuroscience can change the landscape and the human mindset that is excessively redundant and harmful.
Imagine therapies that help the world gain better life standards, change their behaviour and outlook. Neuroprotectorants are good for brain and cardiovascular health prevention and to enhance human qualities beneficial to world peace and productivity.
Posted by: arash sabour | 09/28/2011 at 03:16 PM