Anavex Molecules Similar, But Each Must Be Tested
Yes, the Anavex sigma-1 receptor agonist molecules, at least the major ones being used in new human trials (only Anavex 2-73 right now), and later. Anavex 3-71, are apparently very similar.
Regardless, if they are different only by a single hydroxide transposed to a new position (among the many dozens of them) FDA would require separate, individual testing for each form of molecule being proposed for approval.
Most likely, such minor changes would not materially change or affect clinical outcomes. Still, FDA has an obligation to make certain that new, minor re-configurations of the molecule are equally safe and efficacious.
Read typical drug molecule patent application text. First will be the lengthy, detailed chemical description of the molecule, in several forms. Most detailed are the chemical names, and then a graphic representation (molecular or structural model).
The proper, complete chemical name of Anavex 2-73 is tetrahydro-N,N-dimethyl-2,2-diphenyl-3-furanmethanamine hydrochloride.
(Would be fun to say that at a cocktail party, when telling the profound future of Anavex. But, no, I don’t do that. I haven’t memorized it. No good purpose. I’ve memorized the Latin names of several hundred plants and animals I work with professionally. My favorite is Silphium terebinthinaceum. Look it up. Great plant.)
Anavex 3-71 is an enantiomer (specific configuration) of this molecule: (2,8-Dimethyl-1-thia-3,8-diazaspiro[4.5]dec-3-yl)-3-(1Hindol-3-yl)propan-1-one .
Patent drug applications also commonly have text seeking patent protection not only for the specific molecule described and named in the application, but also for any similar molecule that has been chemically modified in minor ways, such as simply moving a hydroxyl (-OH) to another position.
About Anavex for Autism.
Don’t know about this just yet. Because many of the causes of autism occur during cerebral development, at least partially in utero, I’m not certain the Anavex sigma-1 receptor agonists could prevent the neurological mis-connections or malfunctions of the condition. Diagnosis and treatment in utero might be problematic.
But don’t take this conjecture as a “no.” There are a good number of molecules in the Anavex pipeline, with perhaps more to come. I doubt that all have been sufficiently tested in murine models for all of the human diseases that might be treated.
Anavex Life Sciences Corp may eventually have a giant stable of drugs innovatively treating a plethora of diseases and conditions not yet discussed concerning the company. Moreover, as I’ve contended previously, the company many be a great success not only for treatments, but for disease and condition prophylaxis, prevention.
