An article in JMC.

My background is organic chemistry. I was trained medicinal chemistry on the job.
A topic about training medicinal chemistry was discussed in following article. And It was impressive for me.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27668824

“On the job training” is important for medchems because it makes their back ground of molecular design etc.
The author said,
“””
For example, medicinal chemists who work primarily on CNS diseases will likely face different problems than oncology specialists.
“””

BTW, environment around us is changing.

“””
Chemistry CRO’s worldwide have realized explosive growth as the demand grows for low cost, budget flexible synthesis support. And large pharmas have undoubtedly realized significant operating cost savings as a result of chemistry staff reductions and elimination of expensive synthesis lab space.
“””
I think the sentence is true for large pharma but it does not apply to mid or small pharma. But this trend will be main stream of research area.
It’s means lost of opportunity of on the job training for medicinal chemistry and synthetic chemistry.

What is key factor of training medicinal chemistry ?
Knowledge, skill, mindset…? We often discuss about drug likeness. There are several parameters for drug likeness for example LE, LLE, LogP etc. I think it is experience, what kind of problems did they solve, what kind of chemical series did they make.
They will get sense of medicinal chemistry through these experiences.

One of the reference of the article describe interesting experiment.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jm049740z
In the reference, author tried simple experiment with a group of 13 chemist volunteers. They judged as unacceptable from a list of a list of 2000 candidate structures. Each list was unique with the exception of 250 compounds that has been previously rejected as lead candidates.
Surprisingly, only one embedded compound was rejected by all 13 chemists! Only one!!! @_@
And the result indicated that the likelihood of a chemist repeating the same judgement of a compound was roughly 50%. I think it is huge task to get consistency of compounds selection with chemists….. Of course I have no confidence to select same compounds set from large number of dataset.

Back to the article. Table1 shows a notable fact. The table describes about ratio of publications in JMC with property considerations during optimization.
The percentage of the ratio is low in U.S. academia. The author discussed about the data. If reader who is interested, I recommend to read the article.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s