Continuing our evaluation and exploration of another batch of early stage anti-cancer compounds either in late preclinical or phase 1 clinical development, there are some surprises in store this year.

While following the nth molecule in a given space may have utility for patients in the form of the improved design and superior outcomes, here at BSB we’re much more intrigued by uncovering and following novel targets.  Some of these we first wrote about in 2016 or earlier when they were little known and very much under the radar.

As we start to see more clinical data emerge how are things holding up and just as importantly, how is the field evolving in the context of different approaches to the same tumour target?

One of the biggest mistakes I see rookie industry folks commit is to only follow competitors with the same target as the one they have in house.  They’re so blinkered they don’t realise the standard of care can be changed by a completely different regimen from the one they are pursuing.  This means by the time they come to market they have to usurp something they don’t have data against.  It happens all the time, sadly, and can lead to a suboptimal post launch performance.  Oops.

New product development is never easy, although the good news is we have another group of targets/modalities/companies/tumour types to review and discuss – what’s not to like?!

To continue reading our latest highlights on oncology new product development including commentary and analysis BSB subscribers can log-in or you can click to access the content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Posted by