- Biological understanding of malignancy
- Dev. of targeted therapeutics
- Biological characterization of individual patients
- 1980s:
- conventional chemotherapy
- cytotoxics: platinums, taxanes, topoisomerase in hibitors, alkylating agents, etc.
- 1990s:
- 1st generation targeted (ERBB, VEGF)
- herceptin, gleevec...
- 2000s
- 2nd generation targeted (kinases)
- 2010
- Novel Targets (cytotoxic, cytostatic)
- Anatomical => Biological characterization of cancer
- Tumor (histological) => Target (Tumor subsets) => Biology (pathways/networks/processes)
- Must reflect pathophysiology (pathway and network characterization)
- Need to be able to characterize single/rare cell populations
- Must follow patient over time as tumor evolves
- Response and resistance biological profiles
- Today:
- morphology (does not characterize cell type)
- immuno-phenotype
- cytogenetic characterization (closer)
- Tomorrow: pathophysiology-based characterization
- core signaling pathways
- Hypothesis:
- internal signaling networks are superior for patient stratification, rx selection, prediction of outcomes
- DNA -> RNA -> protein -> ... -> cell signaling
- Transport
- Signaling
- Cell division
- DNA damage
- Apoptosis
- Differentiation
- Patient response
SCNP: Flow cytometry
- Gary Nolan (Stanford)
- obtain sample
- evoke and fix cels
- stain with antibodies
- single cell analysis
- -> can compare basal to evoked cell signaling response
- ID of pathway signatures highly predictive of induction response
- Can monitor individual drug response.
- Technological
- Regulatoryt
- Reimbursment
- vested interests
- cultural
- Resistance to change
- Systems approach to characterizing complex biology
- Function rather than anatomical chacterization
- Single cell resolution
- Defining biology/therapeutic outcome at key clinical decision points
- Toward biologically driven clinical decisions and drug development
No comments:
Post a Comment