Friday, February 10, 2012

Site Search

Archive for the ‘New Drugs’ Category

Research at A&M and Scripps finds HIV-killing compound

COLLEGE STATION - A powerful topical preventative for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, could be a step closer to clinical trials, thanks to a newly discovered molecular compound that research at Texas A&M University and the Scripps Research Institute shows dissolves the virus on contact.

The ability of the synthetic compound known as “PD 404,182″ to break apart the AIDS-causing virus before it can infect cells was discovered by Zhilei Chen, assistant professor in the university’s Artie McFerrin Department of Chemical Engineering, and her team of researchers. Their findings appear in the November online edition of “Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy,” a journal of the American Society for Microbiology.

“This is a virucidal small-molecule compound, meaning that it has the ability to kill a virus; in this case that virus is HIV,” Chen says.

“Basically, it acts by breaking the virus open. We found that when HIV comes in contact with this compound, it breaks open and loses its genetic material. In a sense, the virus ‘dissolves,’ and its RNA becomes exposed.

Since RNA is pretty unstable, once it is exposed it’s gone very quickly and the virus is rendered non-infectious.”

In other words, the compound works by quickly ripping open the virus before it can inject its genetic material into a human cell. What’s more – and perhaps even more important – the compound, Chen explains, achieves this by acting on something within the virus other than its viral envelope protein, meaning that the virus can’t alter its proteins to bolster its resistance – something that’s made HIV notoriously difficult to treat.

“We believe this compound is not working on the viral protein of the viruses but on something else common in all the viruses on which we tested it – some cellular material common in these viruses,” Chen notes. “Because this compound is acting on a component that is not encoded by the virus, it will be difficult for the virus to evolve resistance against this compound.”

While not a cure for HIV, the compound demonstrates significant potential for use as a preventative, specifically in the form of a topical gel that could be applied in the vaginal canal, Chen explains.

“We conducted a number of tests to demonstrate that this compound remains active in vaginal fluid and is not rendered ineffective,” Chen says. “In the form of a vaginal gel, the compound would serve as a barrier, acting almost instantaneously to destroy the virus before it could infect a cell, thereby preventing HIV transmission from one person to another.”

Surprisingly, Chen and her team did not set out to discover an HIV preventative. Instead, they were conducting screenings of molecules for use in potential drug therapies targeting hepatitis C virus, which causes the dangerous and often fatal disease of the liver. Employing a screening system developed by Chen, the team screened thousands of molecular compounds, in search of those that could block aspects of the HCV life cycle.

During the course of the screenings, the team made an interesting discovery

- not only was PD 404,182 an HCV inhibitor, it also worked on lentiviruses (the group’s negative control in its experimental procedures). Intrigued by that finding, Chen then tested PD 404,182 on HIV, which itself is a lentivirus and found the compound to be even more effective on HIV than on HCV.

“We believe PD 404,182 acts through a unique and important mechanism,” Chen notes. “Most of the known virucidal compounds interact with the virus membrane, but our compound does not appear to interact with the virus membrane. Instead, it bypasses interaction with the membrane and still compromises the structural integrity of the virus.”

The ability of the compound to avoid interaction with the virus membrane is important because human cells have similar membranes, Chen notes. If the compound were to disrupt the structure of the virus membrane, it could also disrupt and ultimately kill human cells. PD 404,182 doesn’t interact with these membranes and is therefore a more attractive option for clinical treatment, Chen says.

As is the case with any potential pharmaceutical, several key steps are still needed before it winds up on drug store shelves. In addition to several rounds of animal studies to ensure the compound is safe for humans, further collaborations with chemists are needed to continue to improve the efficiency of the compound. Chen says. What’s more, Chen also plans to further explore the mechanism by which PD 404,182 breaks apart HIV.

This work is collaboration between Chen’s team, consisting of graduate students Ana Maria Chamoun and Rudo Simeon, postdoctoral associate Karuppiah Chockalingam, and Professor Philippe Gallay’s team at the Scripps Research Institute.

Source: http://www.kxxv.com/story/16095021/research-at-am-and-scripps-finds-hiv-killing-compound

First Clinical Trial of Autologous Cardiac Stem Cells Shows Positive Results

Initial data from the first ever trial to evaluate autologous cardiac stem cell (CSC) transplants in humans suggests that the treatment improves left ventricular (LV) systolic function by an average of 12% over one year, and reduces infarct size in patients with severe heart failure due to ischemic heart disease. The trial investigators say the results triple the 4% average improvement that they had projected and calls for the start of larger Phase II trials.

Stage A of the ongoing open-label Phase I SCIPIO (Stem Cell Infusion in Patients with Ischemic cardiOmyopathy) study, by investigators at the University of Louisville and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, is evaluating CSC transplantation in patients with severe heart failure secondary to ischemic cardiomyopathy. The target population includes patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), had LV ejection fraction (EF) of less than or equal to 40%, and a previous myocardial infarction.

Treated patients were administered with about a million autologous CSCs by intracoronary infusion, at a mean of 113 days after CABG. To generate the cardiac stem cells, tissue from the right atrial appendage was harvested from the patients at the time of CABG, and CSCs were isolated and expanded at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

Data from 14 of 16 patients assigned to the treatment group, and seven from the control group (best supportive care), have now been published in The Lancet to coincide with data presentation at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions meeting in Orlando, FL. The reported data showed that autologous CSC transplantation led to an increase in LVEF from 30.3% before CSC infusion to 38.5% at four months after infusion. In contrast, the LVEF of seven control patients didn’t change over eight months. The benefits of CSC transplantation was even more pronounced at one year in eight evaluated patients, for whom LVEF increased by 12.3 ejection fraction units compared with baseline. In the seven treated patients evaluated using MRI, infarct size was also shown to have decreased by 24% at 4 months, and 30% at one year.

The trial has been led by Roberto Bolli, M.D., at the University of Louisville and Piero Anversa, Ph.D., at Brigham and Women’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School in Boston. “The results are striking,” Dr. Bolli states. “While we do not yet know why the improvement occurs, we have no doubt now that ejection fraction increased and scarring decreased. If these results hold up in future studies, I believe this could be the biggest revolution in cardiovascular medicine in my lifetime.”

The published paper in The Lancet is titled “Cardiac stem cells in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (SCIPIO): initial results of a randomised Phase I trial.”

Source: http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/first-clinical-trial-of-autologous-cardiac-stem-cells-shows-positive-results/81245949/

Vaccine for ovarian, breast cancer shows promise

(CBS) A new vaccine that targets ovarian and breast cancer has shown promise in early studies, giving scientists hope they may be closer to stopping the deadly diseases.

PICTURES: 25 breast cancer myths busted

Known as PANVAC, the vaccine triggers the immune system to attack tumor cells.

“With this vaccine, we can clearly generate immune responses that lead to clinical responses in some patients,” lead scientist Dr. James Gulley, director and deputy chief of the clinical trials group at the laboratory of tumor immunology and biology at the National Cancer Institute, said in a written statement.

For their research, published in the Nov. 8 issue of Clinical Cancer Research, scientists tested the vaccine on 26 patients, 12 of whom had breast cancer, 14 of whom ovarian. Most of the women had undergone prior chemotherapy treatment.

What did the scientists find? The vaccine caused women with breast cancer’s disease progression to stall for 2.5 months, and their median survival was 14 months. Four had stable disease, meaning the cancer didn’t grow nor shrink. Women with ovarian cancer reported a two month gap in disease progression, and survived for 15 months, and three had stable disease.

The cancer vaccine stalls cancer progression for only a couple of months? What’s the big deal?

“That time frame is not anything to write home about,” Gulley told WebMD. But he said that one of the women who had breast cancer currently shows evidence of cancer after undergoing the experimental vaccine – four years later.

“It gives us encouragement that we may be on to something here,” he said.

That 32-year-old woman was the youngest in the study, according to WebMD, but her cancer had spread to her liver and chest lymphnodes. At 18 months, there was no X-ray evidence of cancer. Gulley isn’t sure why her treatment was so successful, but the woman had only undergone chemotherapy once. That suggests her immune system might have been stronger than the other women’s.

But don’t expect the vaccine on the market anytime soon. This was only a small study, so more needs to be done.

Gulley said interest in a cancer vaccine is increasing among scientists, but said in the statement that “more studies in the appropriate patient populations are required” to ensure safety, and which patients would benefit most.

The National Cancer Institute has more on cancer vaccines in development.

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57321522-10391704/vaccine-for-ovarian-breast-cancer-shows-promise/

Body & Mind – HEALTH U.S. Doctor Cautious About HIV Vaccine

A New York City-based infectious disease specialist said a new vaccine developed by Spanish scientists, which could turn HIV into minor infection status, is reason to be cautiously optimistic.

Dr. Joseph Rahimian said Thursday news of an HIV vaccine is certainly exciting, but questions remain.

“An HIV vaccine has been the holy grail for infectious disease doctors for a very long time,” Rahimian said. “ There are a lot of people interested in creating one and obviously a lot of demand for it, so there would be a lot of excitement if this research is accurate.”

The vaccine, developed by scientists at the Spanish Superior Scientific Research Council (CSIC) in Madrid, works by training the immune system to detect HIV and learn how to combat the virus.

In a trial involving 30 healthy volunteers, scientists found that 90 percent of those who were given the MVA-B vaccine developed an immunity against the virus and 85 percent maintained this for a year.

Professor Mariano Esteban, from CSIC, said, “MVA-B vaccine has proven to be as powerful as any other vaccine currently being studied, or even more.”

He said the vaccine was like showing the body a picture of the HIV, “so that it is able to recognize it if it sees it again in the future.”

“If the virus enters the body and tries to develop in a cell, the immune system is ready to inactivate the virus and destroy the infected cell,” he added. Scientists hope that if bigger trials are successful, HIV would no longer cause AIDS and would be much less contagious.

‘”If this genetic cocktail passes Phase II and Phase III future clinic trials, and makes it into production, in the future HIV could be compared to herpes virus nowadays,” according to the study.

However, Rahimian said this study needs much more room to grow.

“The population that they used is very small, and they followed them out to one year. So one important question is how long does this last for? A vaccine that has to be given repeatedly every year is less exciting than a vaccine that can give long-term immunity,” he said.

On the other hand, Rahimian pointed out there are some vaccines given every year, which are successful, like the flu shot.

“I would say many people have tried to create vaccines, and it is a very difficult task, so any enthusiasm for a successful vaccine is guarded,” he said.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/09/29/new-vaccine-could-turn-hiv-into-minor-infection/

7TH DUESSELDORF SYMPOSIUM ON IMMUNOTOXICOLOGY Biology of the Arylhydrocarbon Receptor

Heinrich Heine University Duesseldorf
September 21 – 24, 2011

AhR research has taken great momentum recently, with a number of seminal discoveries, especially regarding its role in physiological events. This has opened new arenas, attracted new groups into the field, and led to a steep interest in the potential of AhR as a therapeutic target for the immune system, cancer and other diseases.

We invite you to join us for this exciting meeting on the biology of AhR.

Presentations by international renowned speakers.

Sessions will cover

  • AhR and Signaling
  • AhR and Skin biology
  • AhR and Immunology
  • AhR and Neurobiology
  • AhR and Translational Medicine

We invite you to register, submit an abstract and join us for three days of exciting presentations. Opportunities for oral presentations from selected abstracts will be scheduled as well. We look forward to lively scientific exchange.

The meeting will take place from September 21-24, 2011 at the University of Düsseldorf, Germany, Lecture Hall 13B.

Browse Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor (AhR) Ligands

Positive agreement received for approval of AXANUM (low-dose ASA/esomeprazole) in Europe

AstraZeneca today announced that AXANUM, a fixed dose combination of 81 mg low-dose ASA (acetylsalicylic acid) and 20 mg esomeprazole, has received positive agreement for approval in 23 European Union member countries and in Norway. AXANUM is indicated for prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events such as heart attack or stroke, in high-risk CV patients in need of daily low-dose ASA treatment and who are at risk of gastric ulcers.

Low-dose ASA (commonly known as aspirin) is recommended mainstay therapy for patients with high-risk for cardiovascular events. About one third of these patients are also at increased risk of stomach ulcer. Low-dose ASA further increases the risk for gastric ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding. In fact, the most common reason for stopping low-dose ASA treatment is upper gastrointestinal problems. The consequences of interrupting low-dose ASA treatment can be severe, increasing the risk of a heart attack or stroke as early as eight to 10 days later.

AXANUM is the only medicine that ensures every single pill of low-dose ASA comes with built-in protection against gastric ulcers. That means AXANUM has the potential to provide continuous CV protection in this patient population.

The EU decision took place under the decentralised procedure (DCP), with Germany acting as reference member state. This process is now followed by national approvals and local pricing and reimbursement discussions.

Tony Zook, Executive Vice President of AstraZeneca’s Global Commercial Organisation said: “AstraZeneca has had some significant regulatory approvals this year, and we’re pleased with this positive agreement for AXANUM in Europe. We will now work with relevant health authorities to secure reimbursement decisions and get onto formularies to bring this medicine to patients as soon as possible.”

Source: http://www.europeanpharmaceuticalreview.com/8417/news/industry-news/positive-agreement-received-for-approval-of-axanum-low-dose-asaesomeprazole-in-europe/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EPR+-+Newsletter+16+2011&utm_content=EPR+-+Newsletter+16+2011+CID_0d42f174df14efdb3a6804bfbf1f416a&utm_source=Email+marketing&utm_term=Positive+agreement+received+for+approval+of+AXANUM+low-dose+ASAesomeprazole+in+Europe

Daily pill can prevent HIV infection

The partners of people who have HIV can protect themselves from infection by taking a once-daily pill, two groundbreaking studies in Botswana, Kenya and Uganda have shown.

The discovery could bring work to combat Aids close to a “tipping point”, experts say. Attempts to promote condom use to protect against HIV in the hardest-hit parts of the world, and particularly Africa, have hit cultural barriers and had limited success.

But now it appears that men or women who know – or suspect – their partner has HIV could protect themselves, secretly if necessary. The larger study, involving 4,758 “discordant” couples (where one has HIV but the other has not) in Kenya and Uganda, led by the University of Washington’s International Clinical Research Centre, shows that those taking a single daily tablet of the Aids drug tenofovir had 62% fewer infections and those who took a pill combining tenofovir and emtricitabine had 73% fewer infections than those who took a placebo pill.

The drugs have few side-effects, which is important if they are to be given to healthy individuals. Both are made by Gilead, which has licensed their manufacture to generic companies in the developing world, allowing them to produce cheap copies – so this is a relatively inexpensive intervention.

“This study demonstrates that antiretrovirals are a highly potent and fundamental cornerstone for HIV prevention and should become an integral part of global efforts for HIV prevention,” said Dr Connie Celum, professor of global health and medicine at the university and principal investigator of the study, known as the Partners PrEP Study, which was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The second study in Botswana was conducted by the United States Centres for Disease Control. It followed 1,200 heterosexual men and women without HIV who received either a once-daily tenofovir/emtricitabine tablet or a placebo pill. The antiretroviral tablet reduced the risk of acquiring HIV infection by roughly 63% overall.

“This is a major scientific breakthrough which re-confirms the essential role that antiretroviral medicine has to play in the Aids response,” said Michel Sidibé, Executive Director of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/Aids (UNAids). “These studies could help us to reach the tipping point in the HIV epidemic.”

The news follows hard on the heels of another very significant finding – that people with HIV who are taking combinations of antiretroviral drugs not only stay healthy themselves but are unlikely to infect their partner.

The two pieces of research give a massive boost to the cause of rolling out more Aids drugs and treating people at the earliest stage of their illness.

“Effective new HIV prevention tools are urgently needed, and these studies could have enormous impact in preventing heterosexual transmission,” said Dr Margaret Chan, WHO’s director general. “WHO will be working with countries to use the new findings to protect more men and women from HIV infection.”

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/14/hiv-daily-pill-breakthrough

Genentech to Appeal to F.D.A. for Breast Cancer Drug

Genentech this week will step up its efforts to keep the drug Avastin available as a treatment for breast cancer, urging the Food and Drug Administration to give it one more chance to prove the medicine works.

At a hearing on Tuesday and Wednesday in suburban Washington, Genentech will ask the F.D.A. to reconsider its proposal last December to revoke the approval of Avastin for breast cancer on the grounds that new studies did not confirm that the drug helped patients.

Genentech’s approach seems intended to broaden the terms under which Avastin can remain available. The company is arguing that even if the F.D.A. reaffirms that data do not support Avastin’s effectiveness, the approval should be retained while Genentech does one more clinical trial. Avastin has remained available for breast cancer pending the appeal process.

Avastin was put on the market under an accelerated program begun in the early 1990s that allows drugs for serious diseases to be approved with less than the usual amount of evidence, subject to further studies. Dozens of drugs have been approved this way, and in at least a couple of cases approvals have been withdrawn. But this is the first time the F.D.A. will hold a hearing to consider a company’s appeal.

The debate over Avastin has evoked passions on both sides among those involved in women’s health issues. Some patient advocates argue that the F.D.A. needs to revoke the approval to maintain the integrity of the accelerated process and to ensure that cancer patients receive drugs that work.

But some breast cancer patients are expected to testify at the hearing that the drug should be kept available because it helps some women, even if not all.

“It’s so depressing to think that a federal agency can make a decision that can potentially cause me to die,” said Crystal Hanna, 35, a mother of two from Parkersburg, W.Va., who said Avastin has kept her cancer under control for almost a year.

The public comments sent to the F.D.A. before the hearing at its campus outside Washington, overwhelmingly support retaining the approval. Many of them, using virtually identical language, cite the case of Ms. Hanna, who drafted a comment for friends that circulated widely on the Internet.

Even if approval as a breast cancer treatment is ultimately rescinded, Avastin will retain approval to treat lung, colon, kidney and brain cancers. So doctors will be able to use it “off label” to treat breast cancer. But insurers might no longer pay for it for that use, putting the drug, which can cost $88,000 a year, out of reach for many women.

The Avastin issue has become caught up in the politics of overhauling health care, with some critics saying the decision not to pay for it represents rationing and others saying that Medicare should not pay for a drug that does not work. The F.D.A. maintains that it is not permitted to consider costs.

The ultimate decision will be made by the F.D.A. commissioner, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, who appears to have some latitude. The rules say that the F.D.A. “may” revoke the approval of a drug, but does not have to.

“Even where F.D.A. determines that confirmatory trials do not establish clinical benefit, withdrawal is not required and instead should be based on the public health considerations that motivate the accelerated approval statute,” Genentech argues in a summary of its arguments filed before the hearing.

But the F.D.A.’s drug division views the company’s request as a stalling tactic. “How many bites of the apple do you get?” Dr. Richard Pazdur, the director of the agency’s oncology drug division, said in an interview at a cancer conference early this month.

The agency, in a summary of its arguments, says that because it has already determined that the benefits of Avastin do not outweigh the risks, retaining the approval while the new study is conducted “would not be in the interest of the public health and would jeopardize the integrity of the accelerated approval program.”

Genentech and its parent company, Roche, could lose as much as $1 billion in annual sales if the breast cancer approval were revoked. Already Avastin sales for treatment of breast cancer have started declining. The drug is the world’s best-selling cancer drug, with sales last year of roughly $7 billion.

The F.D.A. approved the drug for advanced breast cancer in February 2008, after one clinical trial showed that combining Avastin with another drug, paclitaxel, delayed the median time before tumors worsened by 5.5 months, compared with using paclitaxel alone. But the women who got Avastin did not live significantly longer than those who got only paclitaxel, which is also known by the brand name Taxol.

Subsequent trials, in which Avastin was combined with different chemotherapy drugs, showed a much smaller delay in tumor progression, ranging from less than 1 month to 2.9 months. And again there was no improvement in survival for those receiving Avastin.

Based on those results and on the fact that Avastin has some life-threatening side effects, including bowel perforation and hemorrhaging, the F.D.A.’s cancer drug advisory committee voted 12 to 1 last July that the approval for the treatment of breast cancer be revoked.

The hearing this week will be before the same committee, which will make recommendations to the F.D.A. commissioner. Of the six voting committee members expected to attend, five voted to revoke the approval last July. The sixth was not at that earlier meeting. Since the data have not changed, Genentech, in the summary of its arguments, concedes it is not likely to change the committee’s mind about the benefits of Avastin.

Instead it will argue that the drug with which Avastin is combined matters. Therefore, the company should be given a chance to do another trial in which Avastin is combined with paclitaxel, as in the original trial that led to the drug’s approval.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/health/27drug.html

Kidney improvement sustained by Abbott drug-study

NEW YORK, June 24 (Reuters) – Diabetics with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease showed significant and sustained improvement in kidney function through 52 weeks of treatment with a novel drug being developed by Abbott Laboratories (ABT.N), according to data from a midstage clinical trial.

The oral drug, bardoxolone methyl, is the first medicine to demonstrate improvement in kidney function in patients with the deadly disease and could delay the need for expensive and inconvenient kidney dialysis, researchers said.

Current treatments, which are primarily blood pressure control medicines, have only been able to slow progression of chronic kidney disease.

“This is totally unique in my 20-plus years of treating patients with chronic kidney disease. There’s nothing out there that increases kidney function,” Dr. David Warnock, who presented the data at a European kidney meeting in Prague on Friday, said in a telephone interview.

“The important improvement we saw at the primary endpoint of week 24 is persisting and sustained throughout the entire 52 weeks of treatment,” Warnock added.

Bardoxolone showed statistically significant kidney improvement compared with placebo at all three doses tested — 150 milligrams, 75mg and 25mg — researchers said.

Based on the results of the 227-patient study, Abbott and its partner, privately-held Reata Pharmaceuticals, which discovered the drug, selected the 75mg dose for a recently initiated pivotal Phase III trial.

Bardoxolone is the first drug from a new class called antioxidant inflammatory modulators that work by suppressing inflammation, researchers said.

Patients in the midstage trial had Type 2 diabetes and moderate to severe chronic kidney disease, defined by an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 20 to 45. A person with normally functioning kidneys has an eGFR — a common measure of kidney function — of 100.

The Abbott drug raised eGFR by nearly 30 percent compared with placebo at the two higher doses. Those who got the 75 mg dose had an average eGFR improvement of 10.5, while 150mg patients saw a 9.5 eGFR improvement.

About 21 percent of placebo patients suffered a significant loss of kidney function (more than 25 percent) over the course of the 52 weeks, which is typical for the progressive disease, researchers said.

That compared with just 9 percent with significant kidney function loss for bardoxolone patients, meaning 91 percent experienced beneficial effects on kidney function, Warnock explained.

“What we have now today is a very promising data set that would suggest there is a possibility we can actually improve kidney function even in patients who have far advanced severe chronic kidney disease,” said Warnock, a professor of medicine in the division of nephrology at the University of Alabama in Birmingham.

“If this is confirmed as being clinically significant in terms of benefit to these patients, the prospects are very, very exciting,” he added.

The 1,600-subject Phase III trial will determine whether the new drug can delay progression to dialysis or cardiovascular death among very high risk kidney patients with diabetes.

The most common adverse side effect seen with bardoxolone methyl included muscle spasm, transient elevations in liver enzymes and nausea.

Most of the side effects seen in the first 24 weeks of treatment had moderated or subsided during the latter portion of the study, Warnock said.

“The adverse effect profile was something that we’re quite comfortable with, and we feel comfortable moving forward now with the definitive Phase III outcomes study,” he said.

An estimated 20 million Americans have chronic kidney disease; about 500,000 are on dialysis or in need of transplants, according to the National Kidney Foundation.

Diabetes is the most common cause of end stage renal disease, which progresses to a need for kidney dialysis and death.

“To keep patients off the dialysis machine will be a huge impact in terms of quality of life,” Warnock said.

In addition, end stage renal disease patients consume a huge portion of the Medicare budget compared to their numbers, he said.

“If we can keep people off dialysis, which costs about $75,000 a year, that would be just absolutely huge,” he said.

Results of the Phase II study presented in Prague are also being published in the New England Journal of Medicine. (Reporting by Bill Berkrot; editing by John Wallace)

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/24/abbott-kidney-idUSN1E75L0XM20110624

Pfizer’s Remoxy Fails to Win FDA Approval

WASHINGTON — The latest attempt at an abuse-resistant formulation of oxycodone (Remoxy) failed to win approval from the FDA, according to a statement from Pfizer.

Late Thursday, the company said it had received a complete response letter from the FDA, which described the reasons for the FDA’s decision.

The FDA had turned down an earlier version of the drug in 2008, but Pfizer’s King Pharmaceuticals re-submitted the new drug application in January.

Olivier Brandicourt, Pfizer president and general manager, said in the statement that the company was “working to understand and address the issues in the FDA Complete Response Letter. Pain is an important strategic disease area for Pfizer. We share the concern about misuse and abuse of opioid medicines and are committed to being part of the solution to address this important public health and safety issue.”

Pfizer was, however, successful with another abuse-resistant product — its short-acting oxycodone product, Oxecta, which was approved earlier in the week. An earlier formulation of that drug, too, had been turned down by an FDA advisory panel, but was okayed after the company removed the niacin from its recipe, which was meant to deter oral abuse.

The Oxecta only deters crushing, chewing, snorting, and injecting — not pill-popping.

Making drugs harder to abuse has been one key strategy for some companies in an attempt to control what the government has deemed an epidemic of prescription painkiller abuse.

Source: http://www.medpagetoday.com/PainManagement/PainManagement/27252

New Drug Effectively Treats Hepatitis C

WEDNESDAY, June 22 (HealthDay News) — The recently approved drug Incivek, combined with two standard drugs, is highly effective at treating hepatitis C, a notoriously difficult-to-manage liver disease, two new studies show.

Click here to find out more!

The drug works not only in patients just starting treatment, but in those who failed earlier treatment, the research found.

The hepatitis C virus can lurk in the body for years, causing liver damage, cirrhosis and even liver failure.

“This is a significant advance in the treatment of hepatitis C,” said Dr. David Bernstein, chief of the division of gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y., who was not involved in either study.

“We know that if we can get rid of the hepatitis C, we can prevent the progression of [liver] disease,” he said. “This means we can prevent the progression of cirrhosis, we can prevent the development of cancer and also prevent the need for liver transplantation in a large number of people.”

Incivek (telaprevir) was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in May and is the second drug in a class of drugs called protease inhibitors to be approved to fight hepatitis C. The other drug, called Victrelis (boceprevir), was also approved in May.

The standard treatment for hepatitis C has been a combination of two drugs, pegylated-interferon and ribavirin, which are given for a year. If protease inhibitors such as Incivek are added to the mix, the “viral cure” rate improves and the treatment time is reduced to six months, researchers found.

Both reports were published in the June 23 online edition of the New England Journal of Medicine.

In one study, a Phase 3 trial known as ADVANCE, patients were randomly assigned to either a placebo or the treatment in a double-blind study, which means that neither the patients nor the researchers know who’s getting the drug and who’s getting a sham treatment. This type of study is considered the gold standard for clinical research.

In the ADVANCE trial, 1,088 patients with hepatitis C who had never been treated for the condition were randomly assigned to standard therapy for 48 weeks, or telaprevir combined with standard therapy for eight or for 12 weeks, followed by standard therapy alone for a total treatment time of either 24 or 48 weeks.

The researchers found that 79 percent of those receiving Incivek for the longest period (24 weeks) had a “sustained response,” which basically means their hepatitis C was contained. Among those receiving standard care, 44 percent had a sustained response, the researchers noted.

“We have entered a new era of therapy for hepatitis C, which enables us to cure many more patients than we could before,” said lead researcher Dr. Ira M. Jacobson, from Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City.

Incivek needs to be given along with pegylated-interferon and ribavirin, Jacobson said. The researchers learned early on that Incivek alone reduces the level of the virus, but later the virus can become resistant to the drug, he said.

For the second study, called the REALIZE trial, 663 patients with hepatitis C who had failed standard therapy were divided into three groups. One group received Incivek plus standard therapy, another group was started on pegylated-interferon and ribavirin and then had Incivek added. The third group received standard therapy alone.

Here, the researchers found up to an 88 percent sustained response in patients receiving Incivek, compared with a 24 percent sustained response in the standard treatment group.

“These drugs represent a real milestone in the treatment of this disease,” said lead researcher Dr. Stefan Zeuzem, a professor of medicine at J.W. Goethe University Hospital in Frankfurt, Germany.

“There were very limited treatment options in the past, but now many patients have excellent chances to be cured, even if they already have advanced disease,” he said.

Bernstein noted that in the past, these patients could only be treated with more of the standard therapy for a longer period and the “cure” rate was only 10 percent. “Now you can treat these patients for six months with cure rates approaching 90 percent,” he said. “You are really offering hope to a large number of patients.”

The side effects of the medications include skin rashes, anemia, fatigue, itching, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting and taste changes. Some side effects were serious enough to cause a few participants to drop out, according to the study.

Incivek, made by Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc., is sold to wholesalers for $49,200 for a four-week course of treatment, said Vertex spokeswomen Nikki Levy.

While both Incivek and Victrelis are important breakthroughs in the treatment of hepatitis C, new drugs with even fewer side effects and perhaps shorter treatment times are in clinical trials, Bernstein said.

Hepatitis C affects almost 4 million Americans, most of whom don’t know they’re infected. Often there are no symptoms, but it is the leading cause of liver transplantation in the United States and is linked to as many as 12,000 deaths a year, the researchers say.

Source: http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/digestive-disorders/articles/2011/06/23/new-drug-effectively-treats-hepatitis-c?PageNr=1

Safety Dooms Novel Staph Vaccine

A phase II/III trial of V710, an investigational vaccine for the prevention of Staphylococcus aureus infection, has been stopped for good following a risk-benefit analysis, according to Merck and Intercell AG.

In April, the Data Monitoring Committee recommended suspending enrollment even though a pre-specified interim analysis showed that the trial did not meet futility criteria. No explanation was given. But a decision about whether to continue the trial was put off until an analysis of the risks and benefits could be completed.

After further analysis, the Data Monitoring Committee unanimously recommended termination of the study, according to a statement from the vaccine makers.

The analysis revealed that the vaccine was unlikely to have a significant clinical benefit and may increase the risk of death and multiorgan dysfunction.

“In the additional analyses that were performed, this safety difference was not found to be statistically significant and was also determined not to warrant any action beyond routine safety follow?up,” the statement read.

The trial was designed to evaluate a single injection of V710 for preventing serious S. aureus infections in adult patients who were scheduled to undergo cardiothoracic surgery.

Merck will present the final results of the trial at an upcoming medical meeting.

Source: http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDisease/Vaccines/26921

FDA Okays New HIV Drug

WASHINGTON — The FDA has approved rilpivirine (Edurant) for the treatment of HIV patients who have not yet begun therapy.

The drug, a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, is intended to be used as part of highly active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART) with at least two other medications, the agency said.

Rilpivirine, also known as TMC278, is to be taken once a day with food and offers another medication alternative for physicians and patients, the FDA said in a release.

The agency approved the drug on the basis of safety and effectiveness data from two phase III clinical trials with 1,368 adult participants who had not received prior HIV therapy, as well as an extension trial.

They were randomly assigned to treatment with rilpivirine or efavirenz (Sustiva), as well as other anti-HIV drugs.

In the two trials, the proportion of patients who were able to suppress their virus to undetectable levels was 84.3% for rilpivirine and 82.3% for efavirenz.

Those who started the trials with a high viral load and were assigned to rilpivirine were more likely to fail therapy than those who got efavirenz and the converse was true for those who started with a low level of virus, the researchers reported.

On the other hand, patients were more likely to drop out because of side effects if they were taking efavirenz, leading some observers to call the medication a trade-off.

UPDATE 1-US panel says Optimer’s antibiotic effective

Optimer Pharmaceuticals Inc’s (OPTR.O) experimental antibiotic is safe and effective in treating a bacterial infection that causes diarrhea, a U.S. advisory panel said on Tuesday.

The advisory panel of 13 independent experts voted unanimously that the drug was effective but said there were concerns regarding the drug’s use in pregnant women and children.

However, the panel was divided on whether the oral drug, fidaxomicin, was also effective in lowering the risks of recurrence of infection-related diarrhea.

Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration staff said the drug was effective in fighting an infection that causes a life-threatening diarrhea. [ID:nN01111028]

The FDA is expected to give its decision on the drug by May 30. A positive vote by the panel does not guarantee an approval, but the agency usually follows panel recommendations.

The drug aims to treat diarrhea caused by C. difficile infection (CDI,) a serious illness caused by infection of the lining of the colon. It afflicts more than 700,000 people each year in the United States, according to the company.

Late-stage trials of the drug had shown that it was as effective as the only FDA-approved drug for treating CDI — ViroPharma Inc’s (VPHM.O) Vancocin.

Optimer has a deal with Japan’s Astellas Pharma Inc (4503.T) on the drug. Astellas holds the rights to develop and sell the drug in Europe and parts of the Middle East and Africa.

Trading in the company’s shares was halted pending news of the panel’s decision.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/05/optimerpharma-idUSN0515361620110405

Higher bleeding risk seen in J&J, Bayer clot drug

A blood clot preventer from Johnson & Johnson and Bayer caused a surprisingly high rate of bleeding in a trial of patients with acute illnesses, representing a significant setback for the drugmakers.

Bayer AG shares fell 3.6 percent in Frankfurt on Tuesday. J&J slid 0.6 percent on the New York Stock Exchange.

Industry analysts had predicted the trial of the drug rivaroxaban, if successful, would create a potential $2.8 billion annual market among the study’s population of patients who are susceptible to blood clots while hospitalized for illnesses such as cancer and pneumonia.

“This will surely impact the chances of admission of the drug and is a serious disappointment,” said Markus Huber, a senior trader at ETX Capital, adding that it could have financial repercussions for Bayer.

A lead investigator for earlier North American trials of rivaroxaban in patients getting knee replacements also took a pessimistic view of the new data.

“The data today would not be approvable …. Why approve something with no overall benefit” for patients like those in the trial, said Alexander Turpie, professor of medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario.

Turpie and industry analysts said the results do not preclude other big opportunities for the drug, which is already sold in Europe by Bayer under the brand name Xarelto to prevent blood clots in patients undergoing hip and knee surgery.

The drugmakers are developing the pill to prevent stroke in patients with an irregular heartbeat called atrial fibrillation. Analysts see that market having the potential for $3 billion in annual sales.

“There is disappointment given the recent (Bayer) share price rally and expectations that this was going to start off a positive run of news flow,” said Emmanuel Papadakis at Collins Stewart in London. “But this is a small subset of Xarelto’s total market opportunities.”

Development of new blood clot preventers has been one of the hottest areas in cardiology. Several pharmaceutical companies are vying to come up with a drug of choice to displace decades-old warfarin and other medicines.

Potential rivals to rivaroxaban include apixaban by Pfizer Inc and Bristol-Myers Squibb, edoxaban from Japan’s Daiichi Sankyo and Pradaxa, already being sold by privately held Boehringer Ingelheim.

BLEEDING RISK

The 8,101-patient study released on Tuesday compared the bleeding risk and effectiveness of rivaroxaban with that of the standard injectable treatment enoxaparin in patients hospitalized for acute medical conditions, including heart failure, infectious disease and breathing difficulty.

Injections of enoxaparin, sold by Sanofi-Aventis under the brand name Lovenox, are typically given in the hospital, with treatment lasting no more than two weeks.

After 10 days of treatment in the study, rivaroxaban and enoxaparin were deemed equally effective in preventing dangerous blood clots in the extremities and in the lungs.

But patients taking the J&J drug had a significantly higher rate of bleeding at both 10 and 35 days, which researchers said was a surprising finding that negated the value of the drug for this patient population.

“We did not see a consistently positive benefit-risk balance with rivaroxaban use,” said lead researcher Alexander Cohen of King’s College Hospital in London.

Some 2.8 percent of patients taking rivaroxaban had clinically relevant bleeding at 10 days, compared with 1.2 percent of those receiving enoxaparin — a difference that was highly statistically significant.

At 35 days, 4.1 percent of the rivaroxaban group experienced bleeding, compared with 1.7 percent taking enoxaparin.

Peter DiBattiste, vice president of cardiovascular development for J&J, said the company will conduct additional analyses to see if rivaroxaban can be used more selectively in patients hospitalized with acute medical illness.

He noted the J&J/Bayer drug had similar bleeding risk to enoxaparin in a group of earlier studies involving patients undergoing orthopedic surgery.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/05/us-heart-rivaroxaban-idUSTRE7343CV20110405

Trana Discovery’s HIV Assay Finds Compounds that Inhibit NNRTI and Multi-Drug Resistant HIV Viruses

Trana Discovery, Inc., an infectious disease drug discovery technology company, today announced that a recent study sponsored by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, part of the National Institutes of Health, affirms that bioactive compounds selected using the Trana HIV 201 High-Throughput (HTS) Assay inhibit viral strains demonstrating resistance to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). The results of the in vitro testing indicate that the selected compounds do not appear to act as NNRTIs, but rather by a different mechanism of action. In addition, these compounds were found to modestly inhibit a multi-drug resistant virus that has demonstrated resistance to commonly prescribed HIV treatments such as nevirapine, saquinavir, 3TC and AZT.

The Trana HIV assay is based on the premise that HIV has evolved to use tRNALys3 as a primer for initiation of reverse transcription. The tRNALys3 primer is required to copy its genetic material and generate new viruses. Therefore, the interaction between tRNALys3 and viral genomic RNA represents a potential novel target for HIV drug development. The Trana HIV assay is designed to select compounds that inhibit the use of tRNALys3 by HIV and that in turn can be developed as new anti-HIV drug therapies.

Through a collaboration with Southern Research Institute, the HIV assay was deployed in three separate screening campaigns against more than 120,000 diverse compounds. Seven bioactive compounds were selected for additional follow-up testing and characterization in dose-response against NNRTI-resistant HIV isolates in peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) assays. These seven compounds were previously found to have modest antiviral activity against HIV in a cell-based assay.

Testing against NNRTI-resistant viruses was conducted to study whether or not the compounds were acting as NNRTIs. The results from this testing indicated there was no apparent difference in antiviral activity based on the presence of NNRTI-resistance mutations in the viruses, which indicates the compounds don’t appear to act as NNRTIs.

“These results help to demonstrate that the Trana HIV assay identifies compounds that act through a different mechanism of action,” said Steve Peterson, CEO of Trana Discovery. “Trana has filed for patent protection on these compounds as well as their ability to inhibit HIV-resistant isolates. We are now in a position to license the HIV assay, drug class and bioactive compounds to qualified pharmaceutical companies for further development.”

High-throughput screening of an additional 200,000 compounds using the Trana HIV 201 HTS Assay has recently been completed. Compounds found to be active as a result of this additional screening are currently being identified for similar follow-up testing against HIV replication in cell-based assays. Based on prior experience, similar results are anticipated.

High-throughput screening using the Trana HIV 201 HTS Assay and follow-up testing of compounds for bioactivity against HIV in cell-based assays was performed under the NIAID, DAIDS contract N01-AI-70042; Roger Miller, Project Officer. In addition, testing of the compounds against NNRTI and multi-drug resistant HIV in PBMCs was supported by the NIAID, DAIDS contract N01-AI-70041; Steven Turk, Project Officer.

Source: prlog.org ; TRANA Discovery

Could Starfish Inspire New Cure for Inflammation?

Lurking in the seas of Scotland is an unlikely candidate for a medical breakthrough.

But scientists believe the starfish could hold the key to finding a new treatment for inflammatory conditions such as asthma, hay fever and arthritis.

The species they are interested in is the spiny starfish (Marthasterias glacialis), and in particular the slimy goo that covers its body.

The team says that chemicals in this coating could inspire new medicines.
Diver with starfish The spiny starfish can be found on the west coast of Scotland

While most man-made structures that are placed in the water rapidly get caked with a mixture of marine life, starfish manage to keep their surface clear.

Dr Charlie Bavington, from GlycoMar, a marine biotechnology company based at the Scottish Association for Marine Science in Oban, explained: “Starfish live in the sea, and are bathed in a solution of bacteria, larvae, viruses and all sorts of things that are looking for somewhere to live.

“But starfish are better than Teflon: they have a very efficient anti-fouling surface that prevents things from sticking.”

And it is this non-stick property that has grabbed medical scientists’ attention, particularly in the field of inflammation.

Inflammation is the body’s natural response to an injury or infection, but inflammatory conditions are caused when the immune system begins to rage out of control.

White blood cells, which normally flow easily through our blood vessels, begin to build up and stick to the blood vessel wall, and this can cause tissue damage.

The idea is that a treatment based on starfish slime could effectively coat our blood vessels in the same way the goo covers the marine creature, and prevent this problem.

Dr Bavington said: “It is a very similar situation to something sticking to a starfish in the sea.

“These cells have to stick from a flowing medium to a blood vessel wall, so we thought we could learn something from how starfish prevent this so we could find a way to prevent this in humans.”

While many inflammatory conditions can be effectively treated, for example with steroids, these drugs can often cause unwanted side effects.
Continue reading the main story

But scientists at King’s College London (KCL) think starfish could offer a better solution, and they have been analysing the chemicals in the creature’s non-stick slime.

Clive Page, professor of pharmacology at KCL, said: “The starfish have effectively done a lot of the hard work for us.

“Normally when you are trying to find a new drug to go after a particular target in human beings, you have to screen hundreds of molecules to find something that will give you a lead.

“The starfish is effectively providing us with something that is giving is different leads: it has had billions of years in evolution to come up with molecules that do specific things.”

Having identified promising compounds, the team is now working on creating their own versions of them in the laboratory. They want to create a treatment that is inspired by starfish goo rather than one that is made from it.

Professor Page said: “Conceptually we know this is the right approach.

“It’s not going to happen tomorrow afternoon, but we are learning all the time from nature about how to find new medicines.”

While the starfish-based cure might be some years off, the race to explore the oceans for its medical potential is only just beginning.
Spiny starfish Starfish could be one of many marine creatures to inspire new medicines

A sea snail has already formed the basis of a new painkiller, and scientists are starting to look at a whole range of marine life, from sea cucumbers to seaweed.

Dr David Hughes, an ecologist from the Scottish Association for Marine Science, explained: “Some of the most widespread, widely used medicines come from nature.

“Penicillin is a mould that grows on bread, aspirin comes from willow trees, so it’s not too surprising turning to nature to find useful drugs. But we’ve only very recently begun to look to the sea for a useful source of medicines.”

And with the oceans covering nearly three quarters of the Earth’s surface, scientists have likened the deep to an untapped underwater pharmacy.

Dr Hughes told the BBC: “There is such a huge diversity of animals and plants living in the oceans and very few of them have been tested and investigated in any way.

“We know marine animals and plants produce a huge range of compounds, sometimes very different compounds from those produced by animals and plants on land.

“So many might have useful properties that could be brought into medicine and other medicinal applications.”

Source: BBC.com

Ion Channels Open Doors to New Drugs Increased R&D Efforts Are Overcoming Obstacles and Showing Potential

  • Nina Flanagan
Ion channels make good drug targets—they reside on the cell surface and are fast switching mechanisms. They act like cell transistors, controlling many cell processes. There are close to 500 types of ion channels, yet many remain undiscovered. This was mainly attributed to technology restraints, however, with the recent introduction of HT patch clamping, as well as new assays that facilitate faster, more robust screening, there are more ion channel receptors being detected.

Researchers at the recent Society for Biomolecular Screening conference and CHI’s upcoming “Pharmacology Driven Assays for GPCRs and Ion Channels” shared information on a cornucopia of topics, including the latest enabling technologies, new screening paradigms, and novel approaches to generate GPCRs.

The IonFlux system from Fluxion Biosciences was recently beta tested by scientists at Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research (NIBR). “Compounds, buffers, and waste are contained on a single 96-well plate, eliminating robotic handling. Air pressure drives experiments in microfluidic channels in a layer below the wells. This is a novel approach in automated electrophysiology,” explained Andrew Golden, Ph.D., post-doc fellow.

Robustness is enhanced via recordings taken from 20-cell ensembles (IonFlux HT), and pharmacology improved by recording a full range of concentrations from the same group of cells, according to the company. There are two available systems—the IonFlux 16, which uses 96-well plates, and the IonFlux HT, which uses 384-well plates.

Analysis of the prototype (alpha and beta testing) was initially focused on whether IonFlux could reproduce results demonstrated on other platforms. “The microfluidic approach could be helpful for ligand-gated ion channels—especially for subsets of those for fast desensitizing ligand-gated ion channels where you only add a short pulse of the ligand or neurotransmitter,” explained Mats Holmqvist, Ph.D., research investigator in the center for proteomic chemistry at NIBR.

In addition, Dr. Holmqvist said the hope for the new platform is that it should provide selectivity not only by target but also by function. “You can utilize ‘use dependency’—the accumulation of inhibition with repetitive depolarizations. If an ion channel is active, the drug may be much more potent.” With this new technology, one should be able to refine and understand how a compound affects an ion channel. However, it’s still too early to show whether this will be the case.

Since HT platforms for ion channels are fairly new, standardization across different instruments hasn’t been addressed. “There are different quality control parameters, including the way of recording a single cell per well or ensemble recording in parallel. Some machines use Oracle database versus file formats. We’ve been trying to address that in safety profiling. A quick answer is that we make a summary PDF file of every compound in each experiment that can be accessed any time,” noted Dr. Holmqvist.

Parallel Screening

The traditional screening paradigm involves one target for primary HTS. However, this process “wastes a considerable amount of time to get results, and also wastes efforts on compound management in order to get those compounds ready for testing,” said Peter Hodder, Ph.D., senior director of lead identification for the translation research institute at the Scripps Institute, Florida.

His group uses a parallel screening process that screens compounds against the target and antitarget simultaneously. “Antitarget is an all-encompassing name for any assay you would run that’s different from the target—usually to remove compounds from further consideration,” Dr. Hodder explained. “We found most of those compounds are junk compounds anyway.” The antitarget becomes important for the hit compounds, because it provides information on whether it is something specific to the target or whether it is something nonspecific to the assay format.

Time saved via parallel screening can be four to five weeks per target. In addition, and what is more important and what is harder to gauge, he noted, is saved efforts following false trails, which result in smaller, cleaner datasets. Relevant structure  activity relationships emerge early in a campaign. For example, Dr. Hodder performed an SF1 (transcription factor) assay and ran the antitarget ROR against it and found potent compounds. “If we had relied on primary screening alone, those compounds would not have been selected.”

The parallel-screening format is not specific to any target class. “What’s more important is how to apply it to different target classes or different assay formats.” His group was successful in screening ion channels, including TRPML3 with TRPN1 as the antitarget (TRP is transient-receptor potential). HTS probes confirmed that the target is not located on plasma membranes in native cells.

Dr. Hodder added that this approach can be used to help focus on the most important compounds for drug or probe discovery, but it’s key is in choosing the right antitarget. “If it’s too close in relationship to the target, you’re going to start throwing out compounds you don’t want to during the campaign.”

His group is now performing more sophisticated screening using two or three antitargets and trying to find the overlap of hits that are specific in all three versus two or one of those targets and antitargets. “This challenges us to think about how we present and analyze our data.”

Novel Assays

Some of the challenges of working with ion channels include controlling activity, whether with a small molecule ligand or voltage. Many ion channels inactivate within milliseconds, making HTS difficult.

David Weaver, Ph.D., director at Vanderbilt Institute of Chemical Biology HTS, has been focusing his research efforts on ion channels—especially 7TM (7-Transmembrane) receptors.

“We are interested in looking at some of the effector systems that are more physiologically relevant and one of these is the GIRK (G-protein regulated inwardly rectifying potassium (K+) channel).” His group developed this assay to measure the activity of GI-coupled 7TM receptors. “The idea was whether we could see any differences in the pharmacology and the fact that we may be using a more physiologically relevant end effector rather than using mutant G proteins to couple the change in intracellular calcium.”

The success of the GIRK assay encouraged Dr. Weaver to examine ion channels as end effectors that could be used to generate new assays with physiological relevance. Preliminary data demonstrates the ability to detect changes in M-current (muscarinic-modulated potassium current, usually studied in the brain and peripheral nervous system) activity.

He developed an HTS-compatible assay that can measure and quantify the modulation of M-current downstream from the 7TM receptor using thallium-flux. This optical assay platform can use a commercially available kinetic imaging plate reader.

According to Dr. Weaver, the only nonstandard part of the assay is that he extracts a slope from the initial measurement, instead of fitting a peak amplitude. His hope is to use this assay to further understand the pharmacology of 7TM receptors. “It’s my intent that we can demonstrate that these are good, robust assays for use in HT screens to discover novel modulators of 7TM receptors or the ion channels we’re using as effectors.”

Novel Targets

“Ion channels are terrific molecular targets, and many drugs have been targeted to them,” stated David Clapham, M.D., Ph.D., Aldo R. Castenada professor of cardiovascular research at Children’s Hospital Boston. Yet, one of the biggest challenges is the gold standard assay—the patch clamp.

This is a time-consuming technique—single cell membranes must be broken open and the current must be recorded while controlling voltage in the cell. Although HT assays exist, not all ion channels are suited to them. “The most promising are the very fast, voltage-dependent channels with large, rapid changes and ones less amenable are ones that are similar to each other in their properties, like TRP channels—these are more difficult.”

Dr. Clapham also presented information on what he thought were good, fairly recent, ion-channel targets and included some recent data on some of his work with these targets.

Many TRP channels are involved in sensory functions, like smell, taste, and hearing. TRPV3 is an ion channel that is well expressed in skin. Dr. Clapham demonstrated that both skin barrier formation and some aspects of hair formation are altered by this ion-channel’s activation or block.

It is activated by subtle temperature changes—temperatures about 32ºC—indicating TRPV3 is sensing heat at the skin surface and relating that to the nerves. This indicates it may help regulate body temperature. Growth factors such as EPGR potentiates TRPV3 to bring calcium into karatinocytes, and, in turn, TRPV3 potentiates EPGR, so there’s a positive feedback loop.

“This is important for the proper formation of skin barriers, so that there is normally a cycle of karatinocytes maturing from deeper in the skin to the surface of the skin.” Dr. Clapham added that TRP channels are difficult to work with because they are fairly slow and their properties are often difficult to distinguish. In addition, they are often small in size, and there is a lack of known ways to activate them.

Additional ion channels that Dr. Clapham thought were worth pursuing were the NAV1.7 to NAV1.9 pain targets, which are voltage-gated sodium channels. A new chloride channel, TMAM16-A, and the ORAI channel, which is important in the immune system, were also on the list. An interesting new target for contraception, called CATSPER, is an ion channel only present in mature sperm and required for male fertility. “This may be a good method of contraception without hormones,” said Dr. Clapham.

“Our job is to find new targets and new molecules, and then other people can work with those molecules to target diseases.”

New Approach

There are many challenges for the generation of new GPCRs, said Michel Bouvier, Ph.D., professor and chairman in the department of biochemistry at the University of Montreal. These include selectivity and ligand-biased signaling, where one receptor can couple to different signaling pathways in a cell.

“The problem with this is that you are trying to monitor the efficacy of a compound toward one signaling pathway, but since there are multiple ones, we don’t necessarily know which one to follow that will correlate with a disease or particular activity.” His approach is to develop one assay that could encapsulate in one reading all the signaling pathways and by dissecting the signatures, provide information about the pathways being engaged by a receptor.

Utilizing Roche’s label-free xCELLigence platform, his group is able to measure cell impedence. Each well of the plate has electrodes. As the cells grow, the impedance increases, and when the cells are treated with compounds that bind to receptors, many different pathways are triggered.

The readout reflects changes in impedance from the compound over time—providing a global assessment of the various pathways. Different compounds generate different curve shapes. “We can use this technology to differentiate classes of compounds that have different relative selectivity toward different pathways. It’s generating a simpler way to classify compounds in different efficacy profiles toward different signaling pathways.”

Dr. Bouvier added that they can now, using selective inhibitors of different pathways  such as the generation of cyclic AMP, show how the inhibition influences the shape of the impedance curve. “Not only can we start classifying the ligands in different categories or compounds, but we can start making predictions on which pathways these compounds will be actively inhibiting. His group is planning to develop algorithms to apply to the curve and thus, provide a response as to which pathway is being affected. “We first need to confirm which portion of the curve informs us about each pathway.”

This approach can be used for almost any receptors, reported Dr. Bouvier. It provides a big time savings—one assay instead of four or five. However, he added, “we don’t know yet if all signaling pathways will respond to changes in impedance—from our data so far, we haven’t encountered such a pathway.”

source: genengnews.com

Rising to the Challenge in R&D

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

AIDS Drugs – HIV

In the early 1980s, the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was identi­fied as the etiologic agent of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). More than 3 million people worldwide died from HIV/AIDS in 2003, according to a July 2004 United Nations report. During the same period, about 5 million people contracted the human immunodeficiency virus, bringing the total number of people living with HIV worldwide to 38 million. Although AIDS was called the «gay men’s disease» at the be­ginning of the outbreak, it was soon discovered that sexual intercourse was not the only way of transmission. Blood transfusions and mother-to-baby transmission also spread the virus.

In comparison to the scourges caused by other viruses in history, we were more prepared and have achieved astonishing milestones against AIDS, thanks to our accumulated knowledge and efforts around the globe. HIV was identified and shown to be the cause of AIDS in less than 2% years. It took only another 2 years for blood tests to become commercially available. In 1987, the first anti-HIV drug, AZT, was introduced. With the arrival of the HIV protease inhibitors and triple drug therapy (the cocktail therapy) in 1995, many patients who would otherwise have died are still alive. In 1996, Time magazine named AIDS researcher David Ho «Man of the Year» for his revolutionary idea of the cocktail therapy.

Who discovered HIV was such a contentious is­sue that it took the President of the United States and the Premier of France to settle the dispute.

In 1983 Francoise Barre-Sinoussi and Luc Montagnier, in the laboratory led by Montagnier at the Institut Pasteur de Paris, first detected and later iso­lated a retrovirus, lymphadenopathy-associated virus (LAV), which they believed was the cause of AIDS. During their research on the virus, Montagnier’s lab­oratory collaborated with Robert C. Gallo, a renowned virologist at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), who was one of the most widely referenced scientists in the world in the 1980s and 1990s. Montagnier and Gallo frequently exchanged virus sampies and information. In April 1984, Gallo held a press conference an­nouncing that his laboratory had isolated a retrovirus, human T-lym-photrophic virus (HTLV-III), that he believed to be the cause of AIDS. Gallo was basking in scientific glory and was widely considered a leading contender for the Nobel Prize. Soon it was confirmed that Gallo’s HTLV-III and Montagnier’s LAV were identical. In 1986, a nomenclature com­mittee was set up, chaired by Harold Varmus, an expert in avian retrovirus and then director of the NIH. The NIH committee settled on the name of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

In April 1984, Gallo’s laboratory filed a patent on an HIV blood test kit using his HTLV-IIIB-ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), which was issued in a record 13 months via a special category involving na­tional security. Although Institut Pasteur had filed a patent in the United States much earlier, in December 1983, it was not granted until a later date. Gallo’s HIV test kit was approved by the FDA in 1985. An acrimonious le­gal battle ensued for the priority of the discovery of the HIV between the French and American teams. The contentious scientific and legal contro­versies came to an end in March 1987 when a historic agreement was signed by the directors of the NIH and the Institut Pasteur and ratified by Ronald Reagan and Jacques Chirac. The patents would become the joint properties of the two institutions, which would share the royalties. The three inventors from the NIH, including Gallo, would receive $100,000 annually from the royalties earned.

Even the intervention by two heads of state did not put the matter to rest. In November 1989, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter, John Crewdson, published a 50,000-word article in the Chicago Tribune on the Montagnier-Gallo priority dispute. He concluded that Gallo had either stolen or allowed his samples to be contaminated with Montagnier’s virus. The controversy generated resulted in congressional investigations. In the end, it was found that Mikulas (Mika) Popovic from Czechoslovak­ia, a cell biologist in Gallo’s laboratory, had isolated HTLV-III from a pool by mixing several blood samples from different sources, including Montagnier’s sample, which contained LAV. Pooling blood samples was an unusual practice in virology. In 1991, Gallo admitted in Nature that he had not discovered the new virus. In 1996, he left the NCI, where he had worked for 30 years, to become the director of the Institute of Hu­man Virology at the University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute in Baltimore.

In 1987, the first anti-AIDS drug, AZT, was introduced by Burroughs Wellcome. AZT, which blocks HIV reverse transcriptase activity, stands for azidothymidine, with the generic name of zidovudine and the trade name of Retrovir. Popular media often give the credit to Gertrude Elion of Burroughs Wellcome for having discovered AZT. In fact, al­though Elion and George Hitchings (see chapter 1, page 19) developed the concept of using nucleotides as antimetabolites in treating cancers, AZT itself was synthesized by a group led by Jerome Horowitz of the Detroit Institute of Cancer Research in 1964 as a possible anticancer drug. Horowitz, now a professor at Wayne State University, published his syn­thesis as a note in the. Journal of Organic Chemistry in 1964.

Since its birth, AZT had a checkered life as a drug looking for a disease to treat. AZT did not show efficacy in treating cancers; the drug also failed to prolong the lives of leukemic animals. In 1974, a German laboratory found it effective against viral infection in mice—Wolfram Ostertag of the Max Planck Institute for Experimental Medicine showed that leukemia helper virus (LLV-F) replication by AZT occurred via phosphorylation of AZT to the corresponding triphosphate, which cannot be incorporated into the growing strand of DNA. Ostertag correctly concluded that AZT-triphosphate worked by binding to the growing strand of DNA. Bur­roughs Wellcome acquired AZT and explored the possibility of using it to treat the herpes virus under the guidance of Gertrude Elion, although it did not make it to the market.