Abhishek Tiwari:SCIENCE COMMENTARY: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
*'''Selling System Biology''' | *'''Selling System Biology''' | ||
Synopsis | '''Synopsis''' | ||
No one could figure out why the drug wasn't working. Iressa, an anticancer drug from AstraZeneca, originally seemed very promising. The US Food and Drug Administration approved it as part of its accelerated program in May 2003, suspecting the drug blocked a step in the cell replication pathway of lung cancer and other tumors. But the drug shrunk only 10.6% of tumors. | No one could figure out why the drug wasn't working. Iressa, an anticancer drug from AstraZeneca, originally seemed very promising. The US Food and Drug Administration approved it as part of its accelerated program in May 2003, suspecting the drug blocked a step in the cell replication pathway of lung cancer and other tumors. But the drug shrunk only 10.6% of tumors. | ||
Revision as of 06:11, 23 October 2007
SCIENCE COMMENTARY
The Scientist Volume 21 | Issue 8 | OCTOBER 2007
- Selling System Biology
Synopsis
No one could figure out why the drug wasn't working. Iressa, an anticancer drug from AstraZeneca, originally seemed very promising. The US Food and Drug Administration approved it as part of its accelerated program in May 2003, suspecting the drug blocked a step in the cell replication pathway of lung cancer and other tumors. But the drug shrunk only 10.6% of tumors.
And this is, essentially, the only systems biology question that matters to industry: Will it, either alone or in combination with other strategies, make companies money? For now, Wall Street remains skeptical. "I don't think you can invest in 'systems biology,'" says Anthony Butler at Lehman Brothers in New York. "How are we supposed to translate that to dollars?"
Read more [1]
