What value do zebrafish have to anticancer drug discovery?
Boyuan XiaoEsther Landesman-BollagHui Fenga Department of Pharmacology,Physiology & Biophysics,Cancer Research Center,Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine,Boston,MA,USAb Department of Medicine,Section of Hematology and Medical Oncology,Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine,Boston,MA,USA
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17460441.2024.2313454
2024-02-08
Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery
Abstract:KEYWORDS: Despite billions of dollars invested into cancer drug development each year, studies have shown that oncological clinical trials had a staggeringly low success rate of 3.5% in 2022 [ Citation 1 ]. Drug candidates tested in the commonly used murine models often fail to reproduce a comparable efficacy and safety profile in clinical trials. In addition, failure to meet parameters of ADMET (Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Excretion, and Toxicity) results in the filtering out of many drug candidates in the preclinical phase. Such sunken costs call for changes in methodology and policy to increase the success rates of cancer drug development. One of the strategies is to implement additional in vivo models to identify suitable hits and filter out inadequate candidates early in the pipeline. From the perspective of clinical application, it is difficult to predict treatment responses due to the genetic predisposition of patients and the heterogenicity of cancer. Patient-derived organoids (PDO) and murine patient-derived xenografts (PDX), the commonly used models to simulate responses, have limitations in practicality and accuracy prediction [ Citation 2 ]. This calls for the inclusion of other cancer models to improve the landscape of precision medicine.
pharmacology & pharmacy