Marcel Faber Roundtable: Is our antibiotic pipeline unproductive because of starvation, constipation or lack of inspiration?

Review

Abstract

There are few new antibiotics in the pipeline today. The reasons may include starvation at the front of the pipeline due to inadequate sources of suitable compounds to screen coupled with poorly validated discovery methodologies. A successful antibiotic discovery approach in the past, based upon whole cell antibiotic screening of natural products from actinomycetes and fungi, eventually suffered from constipation in the middle of the pipeline due to rediscovery of known compounds, even though low throughput methodology was employed at the front end. The current lack of productivity may be attributed to the poor choice of strategies to address the discovery of new antibiotics. Recent applications of high throughput in vitro screening of individual antibacterial targets to identify lead compounds from combinatorial chemical libraries, traditional chemical libraries, and partially purified natural product extracts has not produced any significant clinical candidates. The solution to the current dilemma may be to return to natural product whole cell screening. For this approach to work in the current millennium, the process needs to be miniaturized to increase the throughput by orders of magnitude over traditional screening, and the rediscovery of known antibiotics needs to be minimized by methods that can be readily monitored and improved over time.

Keywords

Actinomycetes Antibiotics Natural products Streptomyces 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I thank Linda Lasure for inviting me to participate in the Marcel Faber Roundtable discussion on the pharmaceutical pipeline. I also thank Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc., for support, and Jared Silverman for comments on the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Arai T (1976) Actinomycetes: the boundary microorganisms. Toppan Company Limited, Tokyo, pp 561–651Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baltz RH (2005) Natural product discovery and development at Eli Lilly and Company: one scientist’s view. SIM News 55:5–16Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baltz RH (2005) Antibiotic discovery from actinomycetes: will a renaissance follow the decline and fall. SIM News 55:186–196Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baltz RH, Brian P, Miao V, Wrigley SW (2005) Combinatorial biosynthesis of lipopeptide antibiotics in Streptomyces roseosporus. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol (in press)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berdy J (2005) Bioactive microbial metabolites. J Antibiot 58:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blattner FR, Plunkett G, Block CA, Perna NT, Burland V, Riley M, Collado-Vides J, Glasner JD, Rode CK, Mayhew GF, Gregor J, Davis NW, Kirkpatrick HA, Goeden MA, Rose DJ, Mau B, Shao Y (1997) The complete genome sequence of Escherichia coli K-12. Science 277:1432–1434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bossidy L, Charan R (2002) Execution: the discipline of getting things done. Crown Business, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cane DE, Walsh CT, Khosla C (1998) Harnessing the biosynthetic code: combinations, permutations, and mutations. Science 282:63–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fu X, Albermann C, Zhang C, Thorson JS (2005) Diversifying vancomycin via chemoenzymatic strategies. Org Lett 7:1513–1515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grunwald J, Sieber SA, Mahlert C, Linne U, Marahiel MA (2004) Synthesis and derivatization of daptomycin: a chemoenzymatic route to acidic lipopeptide antibiotics. J Am Chem Soc 126:17025–17031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hahn DR, Gustafson G, Waldron C, Bullard B, Jackson JD, Mitchell J (2005) Butenyl-spinosyns, a natural example of genetic engineering of antibiotic biosynthetic genes. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol (in press)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Henkel T, Brunne RM, Muller H, Reichel F (1999) Statistical investigation into the structural complementarity of natural products and synthetic compounds. Angew Chem Int Ed 38:643–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kahn EJ Jr (1976) All in a century: the first 100 years of Eli Lilly and Company. Eli Lilly and Company, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kouzes JM, Prosner BZ (2002) The leadership challenge, 3rd edn. Jossey-Bass, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lazzirini A, Cavaletti L, Toppo G, Marinelli F (2001) Rare genera of actinomycetes as potential producers of new antibiotics. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 79:399–405Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Matsumura H, Shahab N, Tsurumi Y, Hino M (2003) A comparative study of Malaysian and Japanese actinomycetes using a simple identification method based on partial 16S sequence. Actinomycetologica 17:33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Newman DJ, Cragg GM, Snader KM (2003) Natural products as sources of new drugs over the period 1981–2002. J Nat Prod 66:1022–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Otoguro M, Hayakawa M, Yamazaki T, Iimura Y (2001) An integrated method for the enrichment and selective isolation of Actinokineospora spp. in soil and plant litter. J Appl Microbiol 91:118–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Penn J, Li X, Whiting A, Latif M, Gibson T, Silva CJ, Brian P, Davies J, Miao V, Wrigley SW, Baltz RH (2005) Heterologous production of daptomycin in Streptomyces lividans. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol (in press)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Strohl WR, Woodruff HB, Monaghan RL, Hendlin D, Mochales S, Demain AL, Liesch J (2001) The history of natural products research at Merck & Co., Inc. SIM News 51:5–19Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Suzuki S-I, Okuda T, Komatsubara S (1999) Selective isolation and distribution of Sporichthya strains in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:1930–1935Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suzuki S-I, Okuda T, Komatsubara S (2000) Selective isolation and distribution of Actinobispora strains in soil. Can J Microbiol 46:708–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Suzuki S-I, Okuda T, Komatsubara S (2001) Selective isolation and distribution of the genus Planomonospora in soils. Can J Microbiol 47:253–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Suzuki S-I, Okuda T, Komatsubara S (2001) Selective isolation and study on the global distribution of the genus Planobispora in soils. Can J Microbiol 47:979–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tao J, Wendler P, Connelly G, Lim A, Zhang J, King M, Li T, Silverman JA, Schimmel PR, Tally FP (2000) Drug target validation: lethal infection blocked by inducible peptide. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 97:783–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Waksman SA (1964) Streptomycin: background, isolation, properties, and utilization. Nobel Lecture, December 12, 1952. In: Nobel Lectures, Physiology or Medicine 1942–1962, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 370–388Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Waldron C, Matsushima P, Rosteck PR, Broughton MC, Turner J, Madduri K, Crawford KP, Merlo DJ, Baltz RH (2001) Cloning and analysis of the spinosad biosynthetic gene cluster of Saccharopolyspora spinosa. Chem Biol 8:487–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wang Y, Zhang ZS, Ruan JS, Wang YM, Ali SM (1999) Investigation of actinomycete diversity in the tropical rainforests of Singapore. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 23:178–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Watve G, Tickoo R, Jog MM, Bhole BD (2001) How many antibiotics are produced by the genus Streptomyces? Arch Microbiol 176:391–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Weinstein MJ (2004) Micromonospora antibiotic discovery at Schering/Schering Plough (1961–1973): a personal reminiscence. SIM News 54:56–66Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Woodruff HB, McDaniel LE (1958) The antibiotic approach. In: Cohen ST, Rowatt R (eds) The strategy of chemistry, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 29–48Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yang J, Hoffmeister D, Liu L, Fu X, Thorson JS (2004) Natural product glycorandomization. Bioorg Med Chem 12:1577–1584CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Industrial Microbiology 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc.LexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations