From biomarker strategies to biomarker activities and back.

The pharmaceutical industry must find ways to improve the unacceptably high attrition rate during drug development. Clearly, pharma has moved away from treat-and-see testing of new drugs in patients, with a strong current focus on generating translational biomarkers early in the research process to enable more predictive evaluation of drug action in clinical trials. Underlying such a translational medicine approach is the intensive search for and use of high-quality biomarkers indicative of successful drug target engagement, pharmacological effects, efficacy or safety. This review outlines our rational question-based drug development strategy in which biomarker data drive decisions on which drug candidates to progress to clinical testing.

[1]  Shashi Amur,et al.  Pharmacogenomic Biomarker Information in Drug Labels Approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration: Prevalence of Related Drug Use , 2008, Pharmacotherapy.

[2]  C. Ponting,et al.  Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome , 2004 .

[3]  Ruedi Aebersold,et al.  Mass spectrometry based targeted protein quantification: methods and applications. , 2009, Journal of proteome research.

[4]  A G Sorensen,et al.  The Use of Imaging in the Early Development of Neuropharmacological Drugs: A Survey of Approved NDAs , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[5]  K. Blennow,et al.  Imaging and CSF Studies in the Preclinical Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease , 2007, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Jaekyu Shin,et al.  Pharmacogenetics: from discovery to patient care. , 2009, American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

[7]  T. Ashburn,et al.  Drug repositioning: identifying and developing new uses for existing drugs , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[8]  N. Anderson,et al.  The Human Plasma Proteome , 2002, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[9]  Hanlee P. Ji,et al.  The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project shows inter- and intraplatform reproducibility of gene expression measurements. , 2006, Nature biotechnology.

[10]  Dieter Stoll,et al.  Protein microarrays for diagnostic assays , 2009, Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry.

[11]  Jutta Bachmann,et al.  Protein microarrays: potentials and limitations. , 2009, Frontiers in bioscience.

[12]  J. Ross,et al.  The HER-2 receptor and breast cancer: ten years of targeted anti-HER-2 therapy and personalized medicine. , 2009, The oncologist.

[13]  J. Willmann,et al.  Molecular imaging in drug development , 2008, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[14]  Innovation OR Stagnation.  Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products , 2004 .

[15]  Janet Woodcock,et al.  The FDA critical path initiative and its influence on new drug development. , 2008, Annual review of medicine.

[16]  H. Kotani,et al.  Can Systems Biology Understand Pathway Activation? Gene Expression Signatures as Surrogate Markers for Understanding the Complexity of Pathway Activation , 2008, Current genomics.

[17]  Catalin C. Barbacioru,et al.  Evaluation of DNA microarray results with quantitative gene expression platforms , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[18]  M. Karsdal,et al.  Biochemical markers and the FDA Critical Path: How biomarkers may contribute to the understanding of pathophysiology and provide unique and necessary tools for drug development , 2009, Biomarkers : biochemical indicators of exposure, response, and susceptibility to chemicals.

[19]  T. Hankemeier,et al.  Metabolomics-based systems biology and personalized medicine: moving towards n = 1 clinical trials? , 2006, Pharmacogenomics.

[20]  Daniel Figeys,et al.  Biomarker assay translation from discovery to clinical studies in cancer drug development: quantification of emerging protein biomarkers. , 2007, Advances in cancer research.

[21]  J. Lindon,et al.  Metabonomics and its role in drug development and disease diagnosis , 2004, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[22]  L. Fass.  Imaging and cancer: A review , 2008, Molecular oncology.

[23]  Maqc Consortium.  The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project shows inter- and intraplatform reproducibility of gene expression measurements , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[24]  I. Kola,et al.  Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[25]  I. Kola,et al.  The State of Innovation in Drug Development , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[26]  F. Frueh,et al.  Experience with voluntary and required genomic data submissions to the FDA: summary report from track 1 of the third FDA-DIA-PWG-PhRMA-BIO pharmacogenomics workshop , 2006, The Pharmacogenomics Journal.

[27]  R. Hargreaves,et al.  The Role of Molecular Imaging in Drug Discovery and Development , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[28]  J. Somberg,et al.  First-in-Man (FIM) clinical trials post-TeGenero: a review of the impact of the TeGenero trial on the design, conduct, and ethics of FIM trials. , 2007, American journal of therapeutics.

[29]  Leigh Anderson,et al.  Quantitative Mass Spectrometric Multiple Reaction Monitoring Assays for Major Plasma Proteins* , 2006, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.