Posted by SLS on October 21, 2005, at 8:24:08
In reply to Re: Triple reuptake inhibitors and MAOIs » SLS, posted by Chairman_MAO on October 21, 2005, at 0:18:18
> I feel that drug companies come out with single-entianomer drugs because it's cheaper than R&D, plain and simple. Why develop a totally new drug--even if it helps more people, is simply better, etc--when you can re-patent an entianomer?
I know. However, there are people who report experiential differences between racemate and enantiomereric preparations of citalopram. However, I don't see any new enantiomeric antidepressants of previous racemates poised for development. It seems that the drug companies in general have not opted to go this route to produce patentable antidepressant drugs for market.
The wave of SSRIs seems to have crested with no new ones to be marketed. It would be sad if there were more SSRI compounds that don't produce as many side effects as those currently available that will forever remain on R&D shelves.
A new, small wave of multiple reuptake inhibitors is on the way. Beyond that are a collection of prototypic drugs of varying properties. The drug companies must feel that they have exhausted the market for amine uptake inhibitors. Instead of capitalism working to produce more effective and better uptake inhibitors, it is working to reduce them in an effort to find new marketing niches. The public has mistakenly deemed all uptake inhibitors as "me too" drugs. This is a shame. If we were stuck with only one each of MAOI, TCA, SSRI, and SNRI, the world would be a much more depressed place to live. "Me too" is really "Not exactly you". That difference is enough to get more people well. Once neuroscientists understand exactly what's going on will it be in a better position to establish exactly what "me too" is and is not.
- Scott
poster:SLS
thread:568913
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20051017/msgs/569753.html