
FSU research team makes Zika drug breakthrough - nikunjk
https://news.fsu.edu/news/science-technology/2016/08/29/fsu-research-team-makes-zika-drug-breakthrough/
======
nonbel
Strange, apparently they only blinded themselves for two western blots that
didn't even deserve a place in the main paper. I have found this is an
_extremely_ common issue with virology studies:

>"The screening of two subsets of compounds for antiviral activity
(Supplementary Fig. 2a and Supplementary Fig. 4b) was performed in a blinded
manner, whereas all other experiments were performed in a nonblinded manner."
[http://www.nature.com/nm/index.html](http://www.nature.com/nm/index.html)

Also, I searched for the virus strain they used and the first thing I clicked
on claimed it has issues with relevance in vivo:

>"Anyone who is using viruses termed ZIKV MR766 needs to carefully examine the
sequence composition of their stocks. Multiple viruses all termed MR766 may
have different sequences and biological properties.In the case of the MR766 we
are using in our studies, there is a deletion in the challenge stock that is
strongly selected against quickly in vivo."
[https://zika.labkey.com/wiki/OConnor/ZIKV-002/page.view?name...](https://zika.labkey.com/wiki/OConnor/ZIKV-002/page.view?name=17301_mr766_challenge_comparison)

------
devy
TL;DR, the identified/named drug that may be repuposed to prevent Zika virus
is called Niclosamide, wikipedia has already been updated[1] with its side
benefit :)

Nicolsamide is also listed as WHO's "one of the most important medications
needed in a basic health system."[1]

There should be more drug repurposing researches to be done but it's probably
profit-prohibiting for the big pharmas :(

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niclosamide](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niclosamide)

~~~
Domenic_S
Was the "big pharma" snark really necessary? Seems to me drug repurposing
would be a huge profit-maker.

See also: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-
label_use](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-label_use)

~~~
thirstytho
Unfortunately since they get paid on IP, it's more like the opposite. A minor
revision to replace a proved drug with a re-patentable version is a little
work for a lot of money; proving a new use for an out-of-patent drug is a lot
of work for very little money.

I don't necessarily agree with the snark but we'd probably be better off if
more medical research were not profit-motivated.

~~~
mattkrause
> proving a new use for an out-of-patent drug is a lot of work for very little
> money.

That's not entirely true. There are programs in the US and UK which offer
"marketing exclusivity" for companies that perform trials validating new uses
for existing drugs. These aren't exactly patents, but it does provide a
financial incentive.

------
nolepointer
Yep, surprisingly, research is done here. We don't just have a football team.

~~~
ctvo
Don't forget the circus: [http://circus.fsu.edu](http://circus.fsu.edu)

~~~
protomyth
Wow, a place where you can run away and join the circus and fulfill your
parents expectations of being a doctor.

------
dmritard96
saw this on my fb feed this morning and tbh, was glad the fsu actually got
some headline room. personally not connected to fsu but I see so many MIT...
that some of these other institutions doing big things get lost in the
shuffle.

also really liked the search strategy. first try all the things already
approved by the fda to find something, even if not 100% ideal since its so
much faster than seeking fda approval of something new. Curious how this will
change in the near future given the prevalence of deep learning and with some
of the opentrons type testing systems.

~~~
unimpressive
>also really liked the search strategy. first try all the things already
approved by the fda to find something, even if not 100% fast.

Yup. On the one hand it's unfortunate that they have to do this at all, on the
other hand this may be a larger innovation than the Zika treatments
themselves.

In the long run if this approach can be applied to other diseases it'll save
many lives.

------
maxerickson
If anyone else was surprised by the 584 pregnant women living in the US that
are believed to have been infected, the CDC has the same number here:

[http://www.cdc.gov/zika/geo/pregwomen-
uscases.html](http://www.cdc.gov/zika/geo/pregwomen-uscases.html)

------
dmatthewson
Sounds great. When will we see reputable validation of their extraordinary
claims?

~~~
wccrawford
You got downvoted for this, but this is exactly the problem with "science" and
"journalism" today. They're quick to report any first publication or comment
as a huge breakthrough, but they never even hint that it might be a flawed
study and that the rest of the scientific process (verifying the claim
independently) is still yet to come.

------
iptables
FUCK SHIT UP team

