Home > News & Opinion > Q&A > 2012 > Q&A with Luca Santarelli: Targeting neuronal connections

Q&A with Luca Santarelli: Targeting neuronal connections

Popularity tracker
Emily Singer
12 June 2012

Matching compounds: Luca Santarelli says an important part of drug development for autism will be pairing the right drug with the right child.

But Luca Santarelli, head of neuroscience at Roche, is optimistic that pharmaceutical companies can surmount this obstacle. He points out that many of the autism genes discovered thus far play a role at the synapse, the junction between neurons, narrowing the field for drug makers. Existing drugs might even prove effective, he says, if we can figure out who is most likely to benefit from them.

Roche is also heading a multinational partnership between academia and industry, funded by the European Union, to speed up basic and clinical research in autism. Santarelli tells SFARI.org why he thinks drug development for autism is at a turning point.


SFARI.org: Autism has long been ignored by drug developers. What prompted Roche’s interest in this disorder?

Luca Santarelli: Autism is becoming amenable to drug treatment. We have animal models with the same genetic deficit as in humans and with a full set of symptoms, from molecular changes to behavior. We have the ability to model cell and molecular changes in patients with induced pluripotent stem cells. Proof-of-concept research in schizophrenia and Timothy syndrome has shown you can identify targets from the patients themselves.

We view our commitment to neurodevelopmental disorders as a sign of willingness to take risks and be more innovative. We have learned from our legacy in oncology over the past decade, which has helped us focus more on disease mechanisms than on phenomenology. The past decade of oncology success has proven the importance of understanding the mechanisms of disease.


SFARI.org: How do we get at the mechanisms underlying autism?

LS: Genetics is showing us the way as far as what type of biology is altered in autism. We are also starting to see some activities that better define the clinical side of the disorder, such as from functional and anatomical imaging. But I think those are really in infancy, especially when it comes to the ability to standardize across different sites.


SFARI.org: Is the complexity of autism a major barrier to drug development?

LS: Understanding everything from the bottom up is very challenging. For example, you can’t make mouse models for all the genes that are linked to autism. As we think about drug discovery, we’ll probably have to examine a number of models until we identify clear patterns.  Perhaps there are certain clusters of pathophysiology that underlie the disease. If we can reduce the problem to those clusters, it becomes more tractable from a pharmaceutical perspective.


SFARI.org: What are the most promising drug targets for autism?

LS: From a pharmaceutical standpoint, we can’t develop drugs for all the rare mutations linked to autism. So I think that reduction to the synaptic level is a great opportunity. The synapse has a number of druggable targets that can only be modified in certain ways. If we know what synaptic defects define individuals, I think we’re in good shape.

The real question is, how do you know what patient has what synaptic effect? We likely already have drugs for autism sitting on our shelves; we just don’t have the right patients to give them to.

Comments

Name: RA Jensen
3 July 2012 - 10:00AM

Here is the problem in the alliance between Sfari and Autism Speaks funded researchers and the pharmaceutical industry otherwise dressed up in the new impressive label of 'translational medicine'.

GlaxoSmithKline has received the largest fine, 3 billion dollars, ever placed on the pharmaceutical industry in what the federal government has called the largest healthcare fraud in US history.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jul/02/glaxosmithkline-drug-fraud

The history of drug treatments for autism is marked by failure and even severe life threatening side effects. Loretta Bender a leading autism researchers in the 1960's found that treatment of autism with LSD was an effective treatment for autism. Ritvo found that treatment with fenfloramine was effective in the treatment of autism. Years later fenfloramine was removed from the marketplace after it was found to increase the rate of heart valve defects. More recently Eric Hollander found that treament with a liquid form of Prozac was effective in treating autism. Independant laboratories funded by Autiam Speaks found that Prozac treament in youngsters as young as two years of age was no more effective than placebo. Hollander had taken out a patent for the liquid form of Prozac. He currently is extolling the vitues of oxytocin as an effective drug treatment in autism.

There is noe reason why drug treatments shouldn't be pursued, but it should never be allowed to be conducted by researchers who have a bias towards aeeing improvement and certainly not for researchers who have taken out or applied for patents.
Future tranlational research and especially so with clinic trials in humans should be controlled by or even conducted by the independant researchers designated by the FDA paid for by the pharmaceutical industry.

Add a Comment

You can add a comment by filling out the form below. Plain text formatting.

Question: What is 10 + 4 ?
Your answer: