Outlook

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

A “virtual man” could be the remedy for the research and development (R&D) problems the pharmaceutical industry is currently facing. For a number of organs (e.g., heart, liver, and brain), there are computational representations that have already proved their worth. The European Community financially supports activities in this area, such as the Drug Disease Model Resource (DDMoRe) as part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) and the Human Brain Project.

Keywords

Subject Matter Expert Target Validation General System Theory Nervous System Disorder Innovative Medicine Initiative 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    PricewaterhouseCoopers (2011) Introducing the 2020 pharrma series. http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/pharma-life-sciences/pdf/introducing-the-pharma-2020-series-july-2011.pdf (Accessed 15 Mar 2013)
  2. 2.
    PricewaterhouseCoopers (2008) Pharma 2020: Virtual R&D – Which path will you take? http://www.pwc.ch/user_content/editor/files/publ_life/pwc_pharma2020_08_e.pdf (Accessed 15 Mar 2013)
  3. 3.
    Karr JR, Sanghvi JC, Macklin DN, Gutschow MV, Jacobs JM, Bolival B Jr, Assad-Garcia N, Glass JI, Covert MW (2012) A whole-cell computational model predicts phenotype from genotype. Cell 150:389–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Noble D (2002) Modeling the heart - from genes to cells to the whole organ. Science 295:1678–1682PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Virtual Liver Network http://www.virtual-liver.de (Accessed 15 Mar 2013)
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Paul SM, Mytelka DS, Dunwiddie CT, Persinger CC, Munos BH, Lindborg SR, Schacht AL (2010) How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry’s grand challenge. Nat Rev Drug Discov 9:203–214PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ho RL (2000) Biosystems modeling for in silico target validation: challenges to implementation. Emerg Ther Targets 4:699–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noble D (2002) The rise of computational biology. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 3:460–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geerts Hugo (2011) Mechanistic disease modeling as a useful tool for improving CNS drug research and development. Drug Dev Res 72:66–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    US Food and Drug Administration (2004) Innovation or stagnation: Challenge and opportunity on the critical path to new medical products. http://www.fda.gov/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/CriticalPathInitiative/CriticalPathOpportunitiesReports/ucm077262.htm (Accessed 15 Mar 2013)
  12. 12.
    Sheiner LB (1997) Learning versus confirming in clinical drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 61:275–291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang L, Allerheiligen SR, Lalonde RL, Stanski DR, Pfister M (2010) Fostering culture and optimizing organizational structure for implementing model-based drug development. J Clin Pharmacol 50:146S–150SPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wetherington JD, Pfister M, Banfield CB, Stone JA, Krishna R, Allerheiligen S, Grasela DM (2010) Model-based drug development: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for broad application of pharmacometrics in drug development. J Clin Pharmacol 50:31S–46SPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Suryawanshi S, Zhang L, Pfister M, Meibohm B (2010) The current role of model-based drug development. Expert Opin Drug Discov 5:311–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stone JA, Banfield C, Pfister M, Tannenbaum S, Allerheiligen S, Wetherington JD (2010) Model-based drug development survey finds pharmacometrics impacting decision making in the pharmaceutical industry. J Clin Pharmacol 50:20S–30SPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grasela TH, Slusser R (2010) Improving productivity with model-based drug development: an enterprise perspective. Clin Pharmacol Ther 88:263–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grasela TH, Fiedler-Kelly J, Walawander CA, Owen JS, Cirincione BB, Reitz KE, Ludwig EA, Passarell JA, Dement CW (2005) Challenges in the transition to model-based development. AAPS J 7:E488–E495PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goldman M (2010) The Innovative Medicines Initiative: A European response to the innovation challenge. Clin Pharmacol Ther 88:Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    DDMoRe Consortium. http://www.ddmore.eu/ (Accessed 15 Mar 2013)
  21. 21.
    von Bertalanffy L (1968) General system theory. George Braziller, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Young DL, Michelson S (2012) Systems biology in drug discovery and development. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tretter F, Gebicke-Haerter PJ, Mendoza ER, Winterer G (2010) Systems biology in psychiatric research. Wiley, WeinheimCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sorger PK (2011) Quantitative and systems pharmacology in the post-genomic era: New approaches to discovering drugs and understanding therapeutic mechanisms. An NIH White Paper by the QSP workshop group. (http://isp.hms.harvard.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/NIH-Systems-Pharma-Whitepaper-Sorger-et-al-2011.pdf (Accessed 15 Mar 2013)
  25. 25.
    Holford N, Karlsson MO (2007) Time for quantitative clinical pharmacology: A proposal for a pharmacometrics curriculum. Clin Pharmacol Ther 82:103–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (2012) Mathematics in Industry. http://www.siam.org/reports/mii/2012/report.pdf (Accessed 15 Mar 2013)
  27. 27.
    Cohen JE (2004) Mathematics is biology’s next microscope, only better; biology is mathematics next physics, only better. PLoS Biol 2:e439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pharma Research and Early Development (pRED)F. Hoffmann-La Roche LtdBaselSwitzerland
  2. 2.F. Hoffmann-La Roche LtdBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations