PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Elliot S Vesell

Publications and source records attributed to Elliot S Vesell.

10 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Pharmacology and statistics: recommendations to strengthen a productive partnership.

Critical to the discovery, development and rational use of drugs and vaccines are the foundational principles and proper application of statistics. However, in too many cases, there has been misuse of statistics and/or overemphasis on statistical significance (p < 0.05), as though this criterion possessed truth-guaranteeing properties. To clarify confusion about the proper use of statistics in pharmacology, we summarize briefly the foundational principles of probability; the role of statistics in assessment of causality; the three basic uses of statistical methods, especially those employed in hypothesis testing; and current statistical issues in pharmacological research. We then review and provide examples of the meaning of statistical significance, the consequences of lack of randomization in epidemiology/observation studies, the criteria for measurement instrument validation, the problems with subgroup analyses, the need for multiple comparison statistical methods, and how to handle dropouts and missing data. Finally, based on sound experimental and statistical principles, we make a series of recommendations to both experimentalists and journal editors to improve published pharmacological experiments. These include widespread use of blinding and randomization and/or random selection of subjects in both basic and clinical pharmacology, mandatory use of rigorous evidentiary criteria in epidemiology/observation studies claiming causal associations, proper interpretation of statistical versus clinical/pharmacological significance, appropriate interpretation of meta-analyses, meaningful validation of methods, and a more rational statistical approach to subgroup analyses and genetic association studies.

Bias↗
PubMed2006

Can personalized drug therapy be achieved? A closer look at pharmaco-metabonomics.

Between 1930 and 1990, several dozen high-penetrance, predominantly monogenic disorders were identified and characterized, which led some investigators to speculate that individualized drug treatment was just around the corner. Informative DNA tests were sought to determine genetic predisposition to toxicity and cancer, thereby identifying individuals in which a drug was likely to be effective and those at increased risk of drug toxicity. These assays represent the leading edge of phenotype-genotype association studies, which are a major goal of clinical pharmacology and pharmacogenomics. Because of the complexity of the genome, however, the task is more challenging than anticipated originally. In the past decade we have come to appreciate how difficult it is to determine unequivocally either an exact phenotype or genotype. In the near future it seems unlikely that, by themselves, either transcriptomics or proteomics will be particularly helpful in achieving individualized drug therapy. However, recent advances in metabonomics are exciting and show promise. In the future, and perhaps in combination with proteomics, metabonomics might complement genomics in achieving personalized drug therapy.

Biomarkers↗
PubMed2006

The heart of drug discovery and development: rational target selection.

Critical to the discovery and development of drugs and vaccines is the rational selection of biochemical, immunologic or molecular targets. To understand the rationale for target selection, we review strengths and weaknesses of the four main approaches: whole animal disease models; molecular targeting; epidemiology/observation studies, and genomics. After classifying diseases into those with a relatively stable pathophysiology (e.g., hypertension and gout) versus those with an unstable pathophysiology (e.g., AIDS and influenza) to aid in understanding target selection, we provide examples of successful and unsuccessful selection of drug and vaccine targets, focusing on the molecular and epidemiological/observational approaches. We discuss the reasons that molecular targeting has led to successful control of many diseases, whereas the epidemiological/observational approach has had a checkered history. We also assess the potential power of the genomic approach, specifically the curative versus controlling/preventive strategies. With combined genetic and molecular approaches and judicious use of whole animal models and properly performed epidemiology/observation studies to select the appropriate targets, the future for controlling, preventing and even curing many diseases is very bright indeed.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

The power of pharmacological sciences: the example of proton pump inhibitors.

Critics have questioned the foundational principles of pharmacological sciences and modern drug therapy; they also claim that drug therapy is often too expensive or of uncertain value. Contemporaneously, alternative medicine has bloomed. Yet the US government began to pay for drug therapy under Medicare in 2006, an explicit recognition of the value of modern drug therapy. To clarify this confusion, we review the philosophical and scientific foundations of pharmacology, drug discovery and development, the attendant strategies and successful results. We also review and answer the major attacks on the philosophical and scientific foundations of modern pharmacology and drug therapy. Finally, we define the characteristics of an ideal drug. As an example of the principles and strategies of modern pharmacological sciences and their successful application, we focus on the discovery and development of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) of stomach acid production. This class of drugs approaches the ideal and exemplifies successful application of modern pharmacological principles to drug discovery and development. Moreover, the use of PPIs as a pharmacological tool allowed the resolution of important scientific questions, e.g., the role of stomach acid in peptic diseases of the stomach, duodenum and esophagus.

Drug Costs↗
PubMed2004

Advances in pharmacogenomics and individualized drug therapy: exciting challenges that lie ahead.

Between the 1930s and 1990s, several dozen predominantly monogenic, high-penetrance disorders involving pharmacogenetics were described, fueling the crusade that gene-drug interactions are quite simple. Then, in 1990, the Human Genome Project was established; in 1995, the term pharmacogenomics was introduced; finally, the complexities of determining an unequivocal phenotype, as well as an unequivocal genotype, have recently become apparent. Since 1965, more than 1000 reviews on this topic have painted an overly optimistic picture-suggesting that the advent of individualized drug therapy used by the practicing physician is fast approaching. For many reasons listed here, however, we emphasize that these high expectations must be tempered. We now realize that the nucleotide sequence of the genome represents only a starting point from which we must proceed to a more difficult stage: knowledge of the function encoded and how this affects the phenotype. To achieve individualized drug therapy, a high level of accuracy and precision is required of any clinical test proposed in human patients. Finally, we suggest that metabonomics, perhaps in combination with proteomics, might complement genomics in eventually helping us to achieve individualized drug therapy.

Drug Therapy↗
PubMed2004

From progress to regression: biomedical research funding.

Despite great advances in health-related research and health care, major challenges remain regarding the causes and cures of many diseases; these may be overcome with further research. Our society is enthusiastic about fostering such investigations. However, available federal funds limit many such projects. Previously there have been sizable increases in the NIH budget, but because of the escalating cost of scientific investigation and the pressures of financing other much-needed governmental programs, recent growth in biomedical research funding has barely kept up with inflation. This article focuses on select attempts to sustain the record of scientific achievement enabled in the past by continued increasing investment and also suggests some solutions.

Biomedical Research↗
PubMed2003

Pharmacogenomics and "individualized drug therapy": high expectations and disappointing achievements.

Since 1965 there have been more than 800 pharmacogenetics/genomics reviews - most suggesting that we are on the verge of offering individualized drug therapy to everyone. However, there are numerous reasons why this approach will be extremely difficult to achieve in the foreseeable future. Drug treatment outcome represents a complex phenotype, encoded by dozens, if not hundreds, of genes, and affected by many environmental factors; therefore, we will almost always see a gradient of response. Phenotyping assays of blood enzyme activities (if feasible) are generally more successful than DNA genotyping for predicting unequivocal outcomes of drug therapy in each and every patient. Phenotyping with probe drugs has generally not succeeded, because of the overlapping substrate specificities not only of drug-metabolizing enzymes but also transporters, receptors, ion channels, transcription factors, and other drug targets; drug-drug interactions, enzyme induction and inhibition, and multiple (enzyme, transporter, second-messenger, signal transduction) pathways also present enormous problems. Genotyping to predict drug disposition, efficacy, toxicity, and clinical outcome has been proposed, but the success of genotyping in individualized drug therapy currently appears unlikely because of the many shortcomings (frequency of DNA variant sites, ethnic differences, admixture) and complexities (plasticity of the genome, multiple mechanisms for determining sizes and locations of haplotype blocks) of this approach. Genomics is an important tool in basic research; yet, it is unrealistic to include genotyping within the realm of tests available to the practicing clinician in the foreseeable future. The same can be said for transcriptomics and proteomics, which also rely on available sources (tumors, biopsies, excreta). The newly emerging fields of metabonomics and phenomics might offer solutions to anticipating and decreasing individual risk for adverse drug reactions in each individual patient; however, tests based on these approaches are not expected to become available to the practicing clinician for at least the next 5-10 years.

Humans↗
PubMed2002

A rational approach to the selection of useful drugs for clinical practice.

Confusion exists concerning optimal selection of drugs for clinical practice. Many reasons contribute to this confusion which derives from various sources including industry, the FDA and often less than ideal education of physicians in clinical pharmacology during medical school and thereafter. This presentation does not focus on allocating blame for the current unsatisfactory situation, but rather offers a solution to improve drug therapy. Our educational solution consists of a paradigm for rational drug therapy, specifically a checklist of eight criteria for physicians to review before prescribing drugs. Such a review would facilitate better estimation by physicians of risk/benefit ratios involving new, often expensive and, in some cases, questionably effective and safe drugs.

Decision Making↗
PubMed2002

Which studies of therapy merit credence? Vitamin E and estrogen therapy as cautionary examples.

A vast and continuously growing amount of material on drugs exists in the literature to read and evaluate. Frequently, the papers and their recommendations are conflicting and contradictory. Readers are faced with the dilemma of deciding what to believe. The need for evidence-based medicine as a foundation for optimal clinical research and patient care requires application of the best scientific methods. Various methods are discussed. Generally, the most powerful method to test a clinical hypothesis is the randomized, controlled clinical trial. By contrast, epidemiology/observation studies have certain inherent weaknesses that can lead to erroneous conclusions. The examples of estrogen therapy in postmenopausal women and of vitamin E therapy to reduce cardiovascular risk are discussed extensively to provide historical perspective and to demonstrate erroneous conclusions reached using epidemiology/observation studies. The sociology of journal publication is briefly described, and an attempt is made to assess who benefits and who is harmed when leading medical journals publish erroneous results. Types of bias and confounding issues leading to errors are discussed, and the need is emphasized for publication of rigorous studies after careful evaluation by editors to avoid repetition of past mistakes and to ensure publication of correct medical information.

Aged↗