Targeted medicines are far off

[Guest guest]

Interesting article that reminds me that as time goes on and I am still here

and healthy I am mindful to be thankful for Gleevec...

Have a lovely Monday!

Cheers,

Cheryl-Anne

Targeted medicines are far off

September 26, 2005

Personalized medicines targeted according to a patient's genetic profile

have been over-hyped and their widespread use is still 15 to 20 years away,

leading scientists said last week.

The field, known as pharmacogenetics, has made strides in the battle against

certain cancers and shows great promise in improving efficacy, reducing

adverse reactions of drugs and limiting medical costs.

However, a report by the Royal Society, an independent academy of leading

scientists, said more research into the genetics of complex diseases, DNA

testing, international guidelines, and investment were needed before

targeted therapies would be widely available.

''Personalized medicines show promise but they have undoubtedly been

over-hyped, " said Weatherall, who chairs the working group that

produced the report.

''This is a long-term goal and it will take many years to come to fruition. "

The sequencing of the human genome paved the way for scientists and drug

firms to match drugs and doses to particular patients and sparked

predictions it could occur quickly.

For some cancer patients, it already has.

Novartis's Gleevec for leukemia and Genentech's Herceptin for breast cancer

are so-called smart drugs that target molecular abnormalities or altered

genes that promote tumor growth.

''The cancer field has led the way in the most remarkable way, " Weatherall

told a news conference.

A shortage of researchers, lack of knowledge about the genetics of diseases

and funding have hampered progress against other illnesses. The report

recommends introducing financial incentives at the national and European

level to encourage pharmaceutical companies to develop pharmacogenetic drugs

with smaller potential markets than blockbuster medicines.

The report said the onus would be on governments to fund or provide

incentives for carrying out tests on off-patent drugs.

Weatherall said it represented a major problem because the tests would need

to be done on a drug-by-drug basis.