With the decline of fundamental research in big Pharma there has been much written about the increasing role of academic centers in drug discovery. However, until recently there was not a great deal of solid information about the extent and progress of academic drug discovery centers. Thus much of the discussion was based on opinion and anecdotal information. This has now been remedied to some degree with the publication in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery of a fairly comprehensive survey of US academic drug discovery centers. Some of the major findings of this survey are:
i. Most academic drug discovery is still at a very early stage with few centers having candidates that have passed through the development phases of the 'valley of death' prior to clinical testing.
ii. As compared to big Pharma, academic centers are placing more emphasis on drugs for orphan diseases and for diseases that primarily affect less developed nations.
iii. Academic centers seem more wiling to address higher risk, novel targets that do not yet have clinical validation as playing a role in human disease.
iv. When asked to compare academic and industrial drug discovery research the survey respondents indicated that academia was much stronger than industry in disease biology expertise and innovation, while industry was perceived to be stronger in medicinal chemistry and in assay development and screening.
While these observations are not surprising, they provide a data-based benchmark for future evaluation of the progress of academic drug discovery.