Re:Why huge gains in drug discovery tech have led to longer ...
by searine on Monday March 07, 2016 @03:35PM
(#11241415)
>This goes back to the phenotypic screening argument.
Truth. Domagk would have missed sulfa all together if he had been using an in-vitro strep model.
Prontosil (what Donmagk discovered), and azodye connected to a sulfa molecule, must be enzymatically digested into the individual azo and sulfa molecules before it becomes biologically active.
Sometimes reduction of a problem, looses the problem all together.
This goes back to the phenotypic screening argument.
Unless your biological model captures most of the factors involved in a biological system, it's not worth much. You might get a great hit, then put it in an animal model and get nothing.
There are a ton of examples of the value of phenotypic screening in past drug discovery. The discovery of benzodiazepines (Valium, etc) was completely random. Hoffman created some new molecules and just injected them into mice. When the mice fell asleep, he followed up on it.
Of course, phenotypic screening is not a panacea. It's expensive and has problems of it's own.