Former Chemical Week colleague Rick Mullin, now a senior editor with Chemical and Engineering News, just wrote a nice piece profiling three individuals who are helping to bring drug manufacturing into the 21st century, by taking a more "operations" and "results" oriented approach.
We'd developed an RSS feed of Bloomberg and AP clips pertinent to pharma, but let it slide a bit, due to technical issues and the fact that Bloomberg et al. didn't cover the drug industry (at least on TV) as much as they generally do, in May.
Just read in Pharmalot, that Tufts professor Dr. Carlat (whose New York Times op ed on CME generated so much discussion) has just started up a blog devoted exclusively to this subject. This blog promises to make for very interesting reading for some time to come (at least, until the...
Yesterday's FDA panel rejection of Sanofi's weight loss drug Acomplia could mean trouble ahead for Pfizer and Merck, which are now in Phase III testing of drugs with similar modes of action (targeting endocannabinoid receptors), The Science Daily reported yesterday.
More evidence that FDA is serious about becoming more efficient (and using the Internet more effectively): The Agency will provide, on its web site, draft recommendations on how to design the product-specific bioequivalence studies required for Abbreviated New Drug Applications.
The drug, in Phase III testing in the U.S., would have treated diabetes while lowering blood pressure. It combined Takeda's diabetes treatment, Actos, with an angiotensin receptor blocker. The company reportedly found it difficult to combine the two drugs.
In our next issue, Bikash Chatterjee, president of Pharmatech consultants, USP advisor and president elect of ASQ's Northern California chapter responds to an article we'd published in April on FDA's move to become more scientifically-driven. It's a must-read; watch for it in June's issue.
Is Big Pharma heading down the road travelled by Detroit's Big Three automakers? API manufacturing expert Girish Malhotra asks that question as he examines the future of big pharma in an op ed that we'll publish next month. The parallels might seem striking: for years, U.S.