4 ms·

I don't think 23andme's strongest asset point would be in direct drug discovery, but rather in helping target sub-populations for clinical trials. The SNP data

I don't think 23andme's strongest asset point would be in direct drug discovery, but rather in helping target sub-populations for clinical trials. The SNP data that 23andme has is relatively low quality compared to proper sequencing, but (combined with their survey data) is probably at least as good, or better information available for typical clinical trial planning or screening.

logifail 3y ago
> I don't think 23andme's strongest asset point would be in direct drug discovery, but rather in helping target sub-populations for clinical trials Was there an issue with targeting sub-populations for clinical trials beforehand? At an ELI5 level, if you're hoping your drug candidate will help cure disease X, you sign up patients with disease X to join your clinical trial. That's not the hard part! (source: family member works at $bigPharma)
- icegreentea2 3y ago
  The two (related) cases where you'd perhaps want genetic information is: a) If you suspect there is a significant pharmacogenetics component to what you are studying (or related to disease progression). b) You're working on something preventative. From a previous job I worked at (we made PCR tests), there was interest on screening for APOE genotypes to enrich an Alzheimer's drug trial - drug maker believed that APOE genotype would have a significant impact on drug performance. But you're absolutely right that you can often (usually?) do 'enough' enriching without genetic information.
- ackbar03 3y ago
  My understanding is, ideally your clinical trial manages to capture or balance out the different potential factors in genetic variation. An example of this is when they tested the covid vaccine, they wanted to make sure they had enough participation from African American and other ethnicities since these were usually under represented in clinical trials relative to the population, and there are sometimes subtle variations in the way peoples body respond to drugs depending on their race.

logifail 3y ago

> I don't think 23andme's strongest asset point would be in direct drug discovery, but rather in helping target sub-populations for clinical trials Was there an issue with targeting sub-populations for clinical trials beforehand? At an ELI5 level, if you're hoping your drug candidate will help cure disease X, you sign up patients with disease X to join your clinical trial. That's not the hard part! (source: family member works at $bigPharma)

icegreentea2 3y ago
The two (related) cases where you'd perhaps want genetic information is: a) If you suspect there is a significant pharmacogenetics component to what you are studying (or related to disease progression). b) You're working on something preventative. From a previous job I worked at (we made PCR tests), there was interest on screening for APOE genotypes to enrich an Alzheimer's drug trial - drug maker believed that APOE genotype would have a significant impact on drug performance. But you're absolutely right that you can often (usually?) do 'enough' enriching without genetic information.
ackbar03 3y ago
My understanding is, ideally your clinical trial manages to capture or balance out the different potential factors in genetic variation. An example of this is when they tested the covid vaccine, they wanted to make sure they had enough participation from African American and other ethnicities since these were usually under represented in clinical trials relative to the population, and there are sometimes subtle variations in the way peoples body respond to drugs depending on their race.