Bio Screening Industry News

Archive for the 'Reports' Category

January 28, 2010

Karwar scientist’s theory to ‘weed’ out CO2

Filed under: Research Projects, Press Releases, Reports — Editor @ 6:05 pm

KARWAR: While representatives of 192 countries are engaged in climate change debates at Copenhagen, Dr Ullas Naik, a marine scientist at the department of marine biology, at Karnatak University’s PG Centre, here has suggested the unassuming sea weed as a possible cure to the planet’s ills.Calling for the scientific culture of algae, commonly known as sea weed and its conservation and protection, Naik points out that these algae provide much of the earth’s oxygen. They absorb carbon dioxide from the environment and carry out photosynthesis to enhance the productivity.Naik, who presented a paper on his findings at a seminar at the university recently, says the discovery has shown that these marine weeds have a remarkable ability to detoxify serious organic pollutants such as TNT or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.According to him, these algae have an intrinsic ability to detoxify TNT 5-10 times faster than any known terrestrial plant.Since some of the marine organisms, particularly marine invertebrates like clamps, shrimp, oyster or crab, the staple food for many, tend to accumulate toxins, growth of sea weeds will have important implications for sea food safety, he asserts.Marine algae contain protein (5- 10%), fat (0.5-1.5%), ash (10-18%), fibre (3-6%) and carbohydrates (40-60%). He says they are rich in minerals and vitamins and can be used as food.The bioactive compound found in seaweeds have variety of applications in pharmaceutical field. Naik says attempts should be made for screening pharmaceutically active compounds from seaweeds. In fact, seaweeds will be the medicinal food of this century, Naik opines.Cautioning that these “wonderful marine species’’ should be explored scientifically, he says they can be used as manure and fodder.

January 11, 2010

Rising to the Challenge in R&D

Filed under: Press Releases, Reports, Drug Development, New Drugs — Editor @ 5:22 pm
There has long been a consensus within the pharmaceutical industry that innovation and productivity is a critical focus. Nevertheless, the number of new molecular entities (NMEs) approved each year by FDA shows that industry has not been improving its output, despite progress in development and implementation of enabling technologies.

Over the past 20 years there has actually been a decline in NMEs approved by FDA. Furthermore, many of the NMEs approved are “me-too” molecules for disease states where first-in-class drugs are already on the market. Granted, there are other reasons for the dearth of product innovation—including regulatory issues, an increasing focus on short-term returns by some shareholders, and corporate restructuring—but the fact remains that pharmaceutical companies need NMEs with novel mechanisms and better safety and efficacy than offered in currently available drugs. Clearly, new chemistry allowing access to well known targets that have been intractable to older chemistries could provide a kick-start to the malaise in drug discovery.

A New Kind of Chemistry: Allosteric Modulation
Even as biologics, RNAi, and gene and cell therapies may provide value to patients in the short-to-medium term, small molecule drugs may one day offer patients many of the same benefits in a format that is more patient friendly (i.e. oral administration) and, potentially, with easier manufacturing and/or lower costs compared to non-pharmaceutical drugs. Allosteric modulators are an emerging class of orally available small molecule drugs that may have multiple advantages compared to traditional orthosteric drugs, including biologics.

Allosteric modulators have been shown to achieve greater selectivity, successfully modulating previously intractable therapeutic targets. In addition, orally available small molecule allosteric modulators have been discovered for targets for which only injectable biologic drugs are available. It is easier to achieve selectivity when targeting more heterogeneous allosteric binding sites on targets with therapeutic potential—such as G-Protein Coupled Receptors (GPCRs) and cytokine receptors—than an “active site,” which is often highly conserved across multiple related receptors.

Simply put, the active site on receptors acts as a switch that controls turning receptor signaling. Unlike orthosteric drugs, which turn receptors completely on or off, allosteric modulators act like a dimmer switch to mediate the intensity and frequency of receptor signaling. However, the trigger for signaling remains under the control of the endogenous ligand, which binds the target according to the physiological rhythm determined by the body. In many cases, allowing the body to retain control over initiating signaling while simply increasing or decreasing the amplitude of that signaling may offer a competitive advantage over other approaches. Although it has often been attempted with orthosteric drugs, comparable functional control over receptor signaling cannot be achieved simply by modifying the dose or delivery of orthosteric drugs.

Key Advantages of Allosteric Modulation

  • Because they do not compete for the endogenous ligand binding site and exert their effects even in the presence of endogenous ligands, lower doses of allosteric modulators may have greater potency than orthosteric molecules with similar affinity for the same target. Lower dosing often leads to fewer side effects.
  • Allosteric modulators can be devoid of activity in the absence of endogenous ligands, offering a less disruptive way to influence the functioning of biological systems and therefore could lead to greater safety and fewer tolerability issues.
  • Because they bind on a distinct site, it is possible to create new chemical entities with unfettered intellectual property that re-address well validated GPCR targets for which there are marketed products. In such cases, the goal would be that the allosteric mechanism offer clear differentiation in terms of efficacy and/or side effects.
  • It follows that highly selective allosteric modulators can be made for targets where it has been difficult to make selective orthosteric modulators. For example, orally available small molecule allosteric modulators against GLP-1 and FSH receptors—for which only peptide, protein or hormonal therapies are available—have been discovered.
  • Because they bind at a separate site, it is possible to combine allosteric modulators with orthosteric drugs. For example, a positive allosteric modulator, or PAM, could be used to potentiate an orthosteric agonist. This could alleviate side effects associated with off-target effects seen at high doses of some orthosteric drugs or simply reduce cost of goods for other orthosteric drugs, especially with biologics.

History of Allosteric Modulators
The concept of allosteric modulation is not new; scientists have been discussing it since the first half of the 20th century, and some suspected such a mechanism even earlier. In the 1960s, Roche introduced the tranquilizer Valium, which later was discovered to act by allosteric modulation of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors. More recent allosteric modulators include Sensipar (cinacalcet, from Amgen), a calcium-sensing receptor PAM, and Selzentry (maraviroc, from Pfizer), a CCR5 NAM.

But these first-to-market drugs were found more through serendipity than through focused searches for allosteric modulators. Indeed, the industrialization of allosteric drug discovery is something that many pharma companies and venture capitalists have shied away from due to the risks and the magnitude of investment.

The search for new drugs has long focused on GPCRs, but of roughly 850 known GPCRs less than 200 have been drugged. Compounds identified through screening have typically worked at the orthosteric site, but after finding the so-called “low hanging fruit,” this approach delivers fewer and fewer hits. In the late 1990s, researchers made some breakthroughs, identifying mGluR selective ligands that didn’t bind to the active sites on glutamate receptors, including allosteric modulators, targeting the metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5), which was discovered by researchers at SIBIA Neurosciences in collaboration with Novartis.

The goal soon became finding similar allosteric drugs; and for this, a new type of screening assay was needed. In the mid-1990s, screening assays evolved to include biological function. When the resulting compounds started to show different types of effects on the receptor, researchers concluded allosteric modulation may be playing a role.

In 2001, Vincent Mutel, CEO of Addex Pharmaceuticals, was a pharmacologist at Roche. Almost by chance, he and his colleagues discovered an allosteric molecule that enhanced the activity of the metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 (mGluR1). This glutamate receptor subtype was not tied to any particular disease, but the finding convinced Mutel that allosteric molecules could enhance an effect as well as block.

Addex was founded in 2002 and initial discovery work focused on targeting mGluR5 for addiction. As mGluRs had been intractable to orthosteric chemistry, Dr. Mutel and his team developed biological screening tools that would detect allosteric modulators of mGluR5 and other mGluR subtypes. It turned out that the tools developed could be adapted to almost any GPCR, and eventually to other types of receptors, like cytokine receptors. GPCRs are the targets of more than 30 percent of all medicines currently on the market . The company has disclosed discovering receptors in all three GPCR families and, more recently advances in the discovery of small molecules targeting receptors such as TNF-R1, IL-1R1, GIPR and GLP-1R, targets that have previously only been addressed by injectable protein or peptide therapeutics .

Future of Allosteric Modulators
The role of specific receptor sub-types has been elucidated in many diseases; however, in many cases, it has been challenging to develop sub-type specific drugs. These cases are the low hanging fruit for allosteric modulators. For example, metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) has been implicated and clinically or preclinically validated in multiple diseases for more than two decades. But it took Big Pharma more than 20 years after the cloning of the mGluR5 receptor to identify and begin testing selective molecules against this high value target. In the end most if not all the molecules targeting mGluR5 are allosteric modulators. These molecules have progressed into the clinic and are now showing efficacy in humans in a variety of indications.

Addex’s lead compound ADX10059, a negative allosteric modulator of mGluR5, has shown efficacy in separate early Phase II studies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and migraines. Clinical and preclinical data from Addex and other groups suggest that the product also has potential in Parkinson’s disease, and certain chronic forms of anxiety and depression. Other companies already are working on mGluR5 inhibitors to treat Parkinson’s disease, Fragile X, and neuropathic pain.

The allosteric drugs also could be combined with conventional orthosteric drugs against the same target to maximize the efficacy of the orthosteric and/or allow use of lower doses. This could be a desirable strategy to minimize dose-related, off-target side effects associated with the orthosteric product while potentially also reducing the cost of goods (especially if it is a biologic).

Allosteric modulators may become a life-cycle management strategy for biologics drugs. In the future, orally available small molecule allosteric modulator may be able to replace or complement many biologic drugs. The cost of a prescription allosteric modulator could, in some cases, obviate the opportunity for bio-generic competition while preserving the profit margin of the prescription biologic.

Allosteric drug discovery and development has only just begun. Many skeptics are being won over and it is beginning to become a mainstream approach. With more than 70,000 potential allosteric modulators in its unique biased library and a growing number of proprietary biological screening tools, Addex is leading the field. Its growing pipeline and partnerships serve as increasingly irrefutable validations. The approach, however, is much bigger than one company, with many in the industry predicting that allosteric modulation will become a new therapeutic class in the medical armamentarium.
Source: findpharma.com

October 8, 2009

Agilux Laboratories Hires New Associate Director to Lead In Vitro ADMET Services Division

- Adrian Sheldon, Ph.D., Positions Contract Research Organization for Growth -
WORCESTER, Mass.--(Business Wire)--
Agilux Laboratories, Inc., a Contract Research Organization (CRO) that provides
bioanalytical and in vitro Absorption Distribution Metabolism Excretion
Toxicology (ADMET) services for the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries,
has appointed Dr. Adrian Sheldon as associate director of In Vitro ADMET
Services. In this role, Dr. Sheldon will build the In Vitro ADMET Services
division offering testing services that allow biotechnology and pharmaceutical
companies to screen drug candidates for desirable ADMET properties. Dr. Sheldon
will leverage more than 17 years of industry experience, including establishing
new business units for In Vitro ADMET and Immunochemistry within an established
CRO. He will extend Agilux`s emphasis on customer service, rapid turnaround and
exceptional data quality to the company`s newly formed In Vitro ADMET Services
Testing Division.

"We are excited to have someone with Adrian`s expertise, successful track record
and demonstrated abilities at Agilux," said Jim Jersey, president and CEO at
Agilux. "Adrian brings the right balance of scientific expertise and customer
focus, which is consistent with Agilux`s mission of delivering high quality data
at unprecedented speeds. We are confident that both the Agilux team and our
clients will benefit from his unique skill set."

Prior to Agilux, Dr. Sheldon served as associate director of In Vitro ADMET at
Charles River Laboratories. Prior to Charles River Laboratories, Dr. Sheldon was
group leader in Assay Development/HTS/In Vitro ADMET at ArQule where he
co-managed a team responsible for screening compounds generated by the
industry-leading combinatorial chemistry laboratory. He received his Ph.D. from
Boston University and his A.B. from Harvard University. Dr. Sheldon has authored
numerous scientific publications and holds two patents.

"I am very pleased about joining the team at Agilux," stated Dr. Sheldon. "We
have an incredible opportunity to change the way early stage development
services are delivered and I am confident that I will be able to contribute to
Agilux`s continuing success."

About Agilux Laboratories, Inc.

Agilux Laboratories, Inc. is a privately held contract research organization
(CRO) focused on bioanlaytical and PK/PD testing services for the biotech and
pharmaceutical industries. Leveraging industry and contract research experience
of its management team, the company delivers high quality bioanlaytical
chemistry and PK/PD data more rapidly. Agilux helps clients make better
decisions during drug discovery and development by providing quality data
earlier in the research process by using technologies and systems that increase
turnaround speed well beyond industry standards. Founded in 2007 by industry
experts Jim Jersey, Steve Guyan and Peter Glick, Agilux is headquartered in
Worcester, MA and is funded by private equity firm, Ampersand Ventures. For more
information, call 508-753-5000 or email sguyan@agiliuxlabs.com. Online at
www.agiluxlabs.com.

Agilux Laboratories, Inc.
Steve Guyan
Vice President, Sales and Marketing
508-762-4402
sguyan@agiluxlabs.com
Source: Reuters

August 21, 2009

Drug Approvals, Natural And Unnatural

Filed under: Business and Investment, Reports, Drug Development, R & D — Editor @ 1:16 pm

I seem to have been putting a lot of graphics up this week, so here’s another one. This is borrowed from a recent Science paper on the future of natural-products based drug discovery. It’s interesting both from that viewpoint, and because of the general approval numbers:
Nat%20Prod%20drugs%20and%20approvals%20graph.jpg
And there you have it. Outside of anomalies like 2005, we can say, I think, that the 1980s were a comparative Golden Age of Drug Approvals, that the 1990s held their own but did not reach the earlier heights, and that since 2000 the trend has been dire. If you want some numbers to confirm your intuitions, you can just refer back to this.

As far as natural products go, from what I can see, the percentage of drugs derived from them has remained roughly constant: about half. Looking at the current clinical trial environment, though, the authors see this as likely to decline, and wonder if this is justified or not. They blame two broad factors, one of them being the prevailing drug discovery culture:

The double-digit yearly sales growth that drug companies typically enjoyed until about 10 years ago has led to unrealistically high expectations by their shareholders and great pressure to produce “blockbuster drugs” with more than $1 billion in annual sales (3). In the blockbuster model, a few drugs make the bulk of the profit. For example, eight products accounted for 58% of Pfizer’s annual worldwide sales of $44 billion in 2007.

As an aside, I understand the problems with swinging for the fences all the time, but I don’t see the Pfizer situation above as anything anomalous. That’s a power-law distribution, and sales figures are exactly where you’d expect to see such a thing. A large drug company with its revenues evenly divided out among a group of compounds would be the exception, wouldn’t it?

The other factor that they say has been holding things back is the difficulty of screening and working with many natural products, especially now that we’ve found many of the obvious candidates. A lot of hits from cultures and extracts are due to compounds that you already know about. The authors suggest that new screening approaches could get around this problem, as well as extending the hunt to organisms that don’t respond well to traditional culture techniques.

None of these sound like they’re going to fix things in the near term, but I don’t think that the industry as a whole has any near-term fixes. But since the same techniques used to isolate and work with tricky natural product structures will be able to help out in other areas, too, I wish the people working on them luck.

January 3, 2008

Biological Drugs Spurring an Evolution in Injectable Drug Delivery

(Amherst, NH) - The success of recombinant protein drugs such as Enbrel, Remicade, and Herceptin in treating refractory conditions is fueling the search for protein and peptide-based therapeutic agents in oncology, inflammation and a host of other disease classes. Led by the proliferation of antibody-based drug candidates, biological drugs as a class continue to outpace all other NCEs in development pipelines and clinical trials. This shift away from small molecule drugs is creating opportunities for drug developers, device designers, packagers and - ultimately - pharmaceutical marketers.

Because biological drugs most often target chronic conditions, dosing strategies and treatment protocols must be developed for long-term use, often for self-administration by patients who may have limitations directly related to their condition. The powerful physiological effects of antibodies, hormones and other biological drugs also increase the need for safety and compliance.

Compliance with drug therapy and disease management protocols has been and is a primary concern within the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries. Efforts to enhance compliance are having a non-negligible effect on drug formulations and delivery decisions, and can be a significant factor in the prescribing decisions of most physicians. Compliance concerns have driven and continue to drive investment in new drug delivery technologies.

As patients live longer and are diagnosed with chronic and often debilitating ailments, the result will be a dramatic increase in self-administration of drug therapies in non-traditional settings for a number of conditions. This trend is creating an increased interest in routes of administration that are patient-friendly and cost-effective. Pharma company decision makers have come to the realization that new drug product success no longer only depends on the medication itself but also on achieving a patient-friendly form of application.

New injectable delivery device designs currently being developed will create new opportunities for alternative injection methods. Reusable injectors designed to accept prefilled syringes or drug cartridges will improve ease-of-use and increase alternative device share of the growing self-injection market. Partnerships between device suppliers and pharmaceutical companies will foster market acceptance of new injection devices for a host of new therapies such as therapeutic vaccines, DNA-based drugs, and protein-derived biologics.

These findings are contained in a comprehensive report, Injectable Drug Delivery: Evolving Markets, Emerging Opportunities. More information is available at www.greystoneassociates.org .

About Greystone
Greystone Associates is a medical and healthcare technology consulting firm providing services in strategic planning, venture development, product commercialization, and technology and market assessment.

June 6, 2007

Drug Patents expire in June 2007 (Tradename

These drug patents will expire in June 2007

Drug Tradename Applicant Company Generic Drug Name Patent Number Patent Expiration
————————————————————————————————–
AEROBID Roche Palo flunisolide 4,933,168 JUN 12,2007
ANTHELIOS SX Loreal Usa avobenzone; ecamsule; octocrylene 4,585,597 JUN 16,2007
ESTRING Pharmacia And Upjohn estradiol 4,871,543 JUN 12,2007
ESTRING Pharmacia And Upjohn estradiol 5,188,835 JUN 12,2007
IMITREX Glaxosmithkline sumatriptan 4,816,470 JUN 28,2007
IMITREX Glaxosmithkline sumatriptan succinate 4,816,470 JUN 28,2007
IMITREX STATDOSE Glaxosmithkline sumatriptan succinate 4,816,470 JUN 28,2007
LAMISIL Novartis terbinafine 4,755,534 JUN 30,2007
LAMISIL Novartis terbinafine hydrochloride 4,755,534 JUN 30,2007
LAMISIL AT Novartis terbinafine hydrochloride 4,755,534 JUN 30,2007
MAVIK Abbott trandolapril 4,933,361 JUN 12,2007
NASALIDE Ivax Res flunisolide 4,933,168 JUN 12,2007
NASAREL Ivax Res flunisolide 4,933,168 JUN 12,2007
PAXIL Glaxosmithkline paroxetine hydrochloride 4,721,723 JUN 29,2007
PAXIL CR Glaxosmithkline paroxetine hydrochloride 4,721,723 JUN 29,2007
PHOTOFRIN Axcan Scandipharm porfimer sodium 4,932,934 JUN 12,2007
TARKA Abbott trandolapril; verapamil hydrochloride 4,933,361 JUN 12,2007
THALITONE Monarch Pharms chlorthalidone 4,933,360 JUN 12,2007
VERELAN Elan Drug verapamil hydrochloride 4,863,742 JUN 19,2007
VERELAN PM Elan Drug verapamil hydrochloride 4,863,742 JUN 19,2007

Source: DrugPatentWatch.com

May 30, 2007

The imminent change of the antithrombotics market

Filed under: Business and Investment, Europe, Press Releases, Reports — admin @ 2:02 pm

The antithrombotics market with the two blockbusters enoxaparin and prasugrel is challenged by generic products as well as by next generation anticoagulants with oral administration and antithrombotics with an improved risk-benefit ratio

Barcelona, Spain | May 30, 2007 | The Business Intelligence firm La Merie S.L. reported today that the US$ 9.6 bln market of the two blockbuster antithrombotic agents enoxaparin and clopidogrel is going to be rearranged by loss of patent protection and emergence of phase III stage competitors with improved profiles. While Bristol-Myers Squibb already suffers from dropping sales (US$ 3.3 bln in 2006 for clopidogrel), Sanofi-Aventis will be affected stronger in its ex-US sales of clopidogrel (US$ 3 bln) and global sales of enoxaparin (3.3 bln). Sanofi-Aventis has the biggest anticoagulant pipeline by numbers, but does not lead the next generation of oral thrombin (factor IIa) and factor Xa inhibitors which have the potential to replace parenteral product enoxaparin, a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). At least seven clinical stage direct thrombin inhibitors and at least 10 clinical stage direct factor Xa inhibitors are in the anticoagulant pipeline lead by Boehringer Ingelheim and Bayer Schering Pharma. Despite the larger market of the antiplatelet agent prasugrel, the number of advanced clinical stage antiplatelet projects is smaller than that of anticoagulants. These results and more were found in a competitor analysis conducted by La Merie Business Intelligence. The competitor analysis of Antithrombotics can be acquired at www.pipelinereview.com, La Merie’s News Center and Online Store.

The competitor analysis evaluated anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents in development. Apart from the oral direct factor IIa and Xa inhibitors, oral heparin and oral LMWH developments are ongoing and novel targets being explored in preclinical and clinical trials. Further companies with a strong antithrombotics portfolio include Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca and Organon & Schering-Plough. The convenience of oral administration will be the most obvious advante of the next generation anticoagulants, but the reduced incidence of thrombotic events and of bleeding side effects key to the commercial success under the light of the imminent approval of the first enoxaparin generics.

About La Merie
La Merie S.L. is a Business Intelligence enterprise fully dedicated to provide high quality R&D information to the biopharmaceutical industry. La Merie offers individual consultancy services and publishes reports and periodicals. For more information visit www.lamerie.com.
About PipelineReview.com
Pipelinereview.com is the News Center and Online Store of La Merie Business Intelligence focused on Research and Development in the Biopharmaceutical Industry. Visitors of PipelineReview.com will find R&D relevant press releases and can receive selected R&D news from one or more of the site’s News Channels. A free R&D Newletter conveniently brings via e-mail a daily selection of the most interesting news from biopharmaceutical R&D. For more information visit pipelinereview.com

May 7, 2007

A Promising Future? Pharmaprojects Reveals an Increase in Drug R&D for 2007

Filed under: Business and Investment, Europe, Press Releases, Reports — admin @ 2:17 pm

LONDON, May 1 /PRNewswire/ — Pharmaprojects, the world’s leading source of business-critical intelligence on drugs in global R&D reveals that after a period of levelling off in recent years in the growth of the number of drugs in development, a new era of pipeline expansion may have begun. Pharmaprojects’ unique ‘Trends Search’ facility, which recently published its new data for 2007, shows a palpable increase in the number of drugs in R&D this year (see Graph 1 above)

As the above graph shows, there had been a period from 2004-2006 of relatively slow growth in the number of drug candidates being pursued, when compared to significant increases seen in the early part of the decade. There had been fears in some sectors that this lack of growth might have signalled a permanent change in the pharmaceutical industry’s fortunes and could even have signified a point at which growth might go into reverse. Hopefully however, this newest figure could represent the beginning of a brighter phase.

Pharmaprojects’ data shows that at this time last year there were just less than 400 fewer products under development within the industry, which considering the cost of bringing drugs through the development process, represents an increased investment of many millions of pounds. Pharmaprojects’ trends search also allows one to drill down into this information further and assess how this overall increase in drug development is reflected in the various stages of the R&D process (see Graph 2 above)

Perhaps the most encouraging result of this further analysis is that this increase is not ascribable to a large rise in the number of preclinical compounds, as is often the case, but that the largest increases are in the clinical stages of drug development. As preclinical compounds stand a relatively low chance of making it to the market, a larger increase here does not necessarily represent a particularly positive trend. However, once a compound makes it past the screening process to enter clinical trials, the possibility of it successfully reaching the market increases dramatically with each further stage achieved.

On a more cautionary note, one should remember not to jump the gun with such analyses. As Ian Lloyd, Managing Editor of Pharmaprojects, states, “One year’s worth of promising data does not mean an end to the industry’s woes. Trends by their very nature only emerge after a number of years, making next year’s figures crucial in determining whether we are seeing a sustained recovery or whether 2007 is merely a blip”. Nonetheless, any positive trend must begin somewhere, and this year’s data makes for encouraging reading indeed.

About Pharmaprojects

Pharmaprojects, the leading database tracking global pharmaceutical development from early preclinical study through to launch or discontinuation, has 27 years’ experience as an information provider to the industry. Pharmaprojects uses a fully-searchable application that allows you to pinpoint the specific information you are looking for, whether it be comprehensive drug profiles, a competitor’s pipeline or licensing opportunities.

About Pharmaprojects’ Trend Analysis

Pharmaprojects provides the unique and unparalleled ability to view trends in the pharmaceutical industry by taking a ’snapshot’ of the database every year since 1995, allowing subscribers to compare year-on-year data across a variety of searchable criteria including drug status, originators, countries, therapies, pharmacologies and more. All data and diagrams contained within this press release are taken directly from Pharmaprojects.

Pharmaprojects is available weekly on the Web and monthly via CD-ROM format. Further details on this story as well as a wealth of information including recent conferences, companies and drug targets are all available in Pharmaprojects’ Update Analysis newsletter. This, as well as a forum of other free information regarding pharmaceutical R&D pipeline intelligence and demo requests for Pharmaprojects, can be found at http://www.pharmaprojects.com

April 6, 2007

Proprietary Formulation Technologies Advancing in Preclinical Drug Development

New Report by Applied Data Research Analyzes the Impact on Drug Development Timelines

(Nashua, NH) – As the availability of new tools for automating the drug discovery process identifies potential drug candidates at an accelerating rate, the formulation limitations of a majority of these new NCEs is creating a bottleneck in preclinical development. Drug developers are responding by exploring drug formulation technologies – often proprietary processes offered by third parties – to negotiate their way past critical steps in the path to commercializing new chemical entities and driving the financial success of their companies.

Much of the current focus in formulation science is concerned with processes that can improve the solubility of APIs. The importance of solubilization technologies is also underscored by the capability they bestow on formulators attempting to re-formulate approved drugs approaching the end of their patent life.

Issues surrounding water insolubility of active compounds have important business and market implications for new drug development. This impact goes beyond potential future drug therapeutics, effectively limiting reformulation strategies for existing products at a time when extending the market life of proprietary drugs through derivative formulations has become a key business strategy.

Drug formulation technology companies are working with drug developers at pharmaceutical companies to help define the prescription formulations that will enter preclinical development and the clinical trial pipeline in the coming months and years. New formulation capabilities will expand the number of new NCEs that can be formulated to meet pharmacochemical thresholds.

More information is available at www.applieddata.org .

About Applied Data

Applied Data Research is a drug therapeutics consulting firm focused on medical market strategies, product commercialization, venture development, and market research. We assist medical market participants in achieving their business objectives through the creation of detailed business development strategies, product commercialization programs, and comprehensive market and technology research and analysis.

Contact:

Greg Stone

Voice: 603-595-6225

Fax: 603-804-0466

www.applieddata.org

Source: Applied Data Research

February 1, 2007

Examine Major Patents Issued in the Last Two Years to the World’s Cell Based Screening & Analysis Industry

Filed under: Business and Investment, Europe, Press Releases, Reports — admin @ 6:58 pm

DUBLIN, Ireland–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Research and Markets (http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c48935 ) has announced the addition of Worldwide Cell Based Screening & Analysis Market for Bio-Pharma Drug Discovery to their offering.

This report reviews, analyzes and sizes the cell based screening and analysis market. The study uncovers interesting information about key equipment, consumables, reagents, software and services that are marketed to biotech and pharmaceutical companies that are doing drug discovery research.

Large bio-pharma companies have commented at industry meetings that fifty percent of their high throughput compound screening projects in drug discovery involves screening cells. The companies are using cell-based assays for both primary and secondary screening and have taken a great interest in the areas of high content screening and high content analysis.

The report assesses the market and maps the competitors on the market landscape with more than 80 companies identified. The financial section sizes the market and discusses the five-year revenue projection. The market is segmented by major product areas as well as market sub segments. This market is also segmented by major world regions to see the growth or how the market share might change.

Major company alliances, M&As, patents that were issued during the last two years are reviewed and analyzed. Large data tables summarize the alliances, M&As and patents. The alliance table summarizes more than 210 deals. The patent table displays key details of over 340 patents.

This research report is designed for people that include marketers, business development, top executives, investors, VCs, consultants, R&D managers, entrepreneurs and etc. More than 42 detailed tables or figures provide key data about items such as strategic alliances, M&As, market size, segments and the like.

This report includes 28 company profiles that provide the reader a snapshot of the companies focus or activities. The provided Internet links help readers access companies own web sites for further review.

Topics Covered
1.        What Cell Analysis is and What We Are Aiming for With This
Research Project
1.1       Our Definition of the Cell Analysis Market
1.2       The Aim of This Research Report

2.        Overview -- Current Market Status and R&D Status in Biotech
and Pharma (Bio-Pharma) for Cell Analysis
2.1       Cell Based Screening & Analysis Helps Pharma Productivity
2.1.1     Drug Making Productivity
2.1.2     Increasing Use of Cell Based Screening and Analysis
Platforms
2.2       Cell-Based Analysis Applications in Bio-Pharma Drug
Discovery & Development
2.2.1     Traditional Pharma Drug Discovery Paradigm & Compound
Screening
2.2.2     Drug Targets and Main Drug Target Classes
2.2.3     Cell Assay Development - Bio-pharmas Make Their Own Assays
2.2.4     High Throughput Screening (HTS) & High Content Screening
(HCS)
2.2.5     Toxicology Testing (Safety Screening)
2.3       Current Equipment & Tools and R&D for Cell Analysis
2.4       Current Technologies and Related R&D for Cell Based
Screening-Analysis
2.5       Current Reagents & Assays and Related R&D for Cell Based
Screening-Analysis
2.6       Main Competitors by Large, Medium and Start-up
(Emerging Companies)

3.        Trends and Directions of Cell Based Screening and Analysis
Equipment and Technologies
3.1       Trends: Cell Screening Equipment
3.1.1     Plate Imaging Equipment for Cell based HTS
3.1.2     Imaging Cytometry Equipment for HCS/ HCA
3.1.3     Emerging Developments In Cell Based Screening
3.2       Trends: Cell Screening Technologies
3.2.1     Labeling Reagents and No-Wash Assays
3.2.2     Cells as Reagents
3.2.3     Stem Cells Used as a Drug Discovery Tool

4.        Alliances & IP
4.1       Summary and Review of Major M&As, Alliances, or Deals
4.1.1     M&A and Alliances at a Glance
4.1.2     Leading M&A Acquirers
4.1.3     Data Tables for M&As and Alliances Involving Cell-Based
Analysis
4.2       Summary of Key Patent IP Involving Cell-Based Analysis

5.        Market Size and Forecast 2006 to 2011
5.1       The Total Worldwide Cell-Based Screening-Analysis Market
Size
5.2       Market Segments by Product Type and Revenues
5.2.1     Major Market Segments by Main Product Areas
5.2.2     Comparison of Major Market Segments by Market Shares,
2007& 2011
5.2.3     Equipment Segment by Product Type
5.2.4     'Consumables' Segment by Product Type
5.2.5     Content Segment by Product Type
5.2.6     Services Segment by Product Type
5.2.7     'Others' Segment by Product Type
5.3       Market Segments By Major Worldwide Regions
5.3.1     Region Segments
5.3.2     Comparison of Region Segments by Market Shares, 2007 & 2011
5.4       Outlook for Leading Commercial Vendors Market Share Rank

6.        Activities of Cell Based Screening-Analysis Companies
6.1       Multiplatform Cell Screening/Analysis Systems
6.1.1 to 6.1.7 Total 7 companies
6.2       Flow Cytometry Screening Systems
6.2.1 to 6.2.4 Total 4 companies
6.3       High Content Screening/Analysis Cell Imaging Systems
6.3.1 to 6.3.5 Total 5 companies
6.4       Cell-Based Screening Assays/Reagents
6.4.1 to 6.4.5 Total 5 companies
6.5       Cell Screening Assays/Reagents
6.5.1 to 6.5.3 Total 3 companies
6.6       Contract Research and Development Services
6.6.1 to 6.6.3 Total 3 companies
6.7       Cell Screening/Analysis Software
6.7.1 to 6.7.4 Total 4 companies

7.        Conclusions: Findings & Opportunities
7.1       Important Findings
7.1.1     Market Size and Growth
7.1.2     Alliances and IP
7.1.3     Bio-Pharma Product & Technology Users
7.1.4     Equipment
7.1.5     Services
7.2       The Cell-Based Screening & Analysis Business/ Tech Market
Roadmap and Opportunities
7.2.1     Major CBSA Products & Services Segments by Growth Rate
7.2.2     Important Growth Areas Within Major Segments

8.        Appendix
8.1       Company Contacts    (Total 85 companies)
8.2       Patent Data Tables  (Total 340 patents)

List of Tables

List of Illustrations

For more information visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c48935

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress