« AstraZeneca's Nasty Numbers |
Main
| A Traffic Record »
January 31, 2013
In Case You Were Wondering What We Thought About the Liver
Posted by Derek
Courtesy of the vital site that is TOC ROFL, I wanted to highlight this graphic from this paper in MedChemComm. I always pictured the liver as sort of a sawmill or shredding machine for our drug candidates, with the hepatic portal vein being the conveyer belt hooked up on the front end. But I have to admit, this is a pretty vivid representation.
Update: See Arr Oh has a few issues - rightly so - with the molecule being munched on. . .
Comments (19)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Pharmacokinetics
POST A COMMENT
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › AstraZeneca's Move To Hot, Happening Cambridge
- › Stealing A Compound, To Set Up in China
- › Tecfidera's Price
- › Novartis Loses the Glivec Patent Fight in India
- › ChemBark Closing Down (Update: Not Really!)
- › Fake Journals - But They'd Like Real Money
- › Chemical Probes Versus Drugs
- › Two New Books
1. john on January 31, 2013 12:31 PM writes...
Other than the pentavalent carbon this looks like the P-1,P-2 left-hand side of the PI Inhibtor Nelfinavir.
Permalink to Comment2. john on January 31, 2013 12:33 PM writes...
Other than the pentavalent carbon this looks like the P-1,P-2 left-hand side of the PI Inhibtor Nelfinavir.
Permalink to Comment3. See Arr Oh on January 31, 2013 12:51 PM writes...
Chemjobber, Organometallica, and I took issue with this exact graphic a few days back: http://justlikecooking.blogspot.com/2013/01/wwwtp-medchemcomm-edition.html
Permalink to Comment4. Chemjobber on January 31, 2013 12:59 PM writes...
See Arr Oh covered this; click on my handle to see his artistic critique.
Permalink to Comment5. Anonymous on January 31, 2013 2:00 PM writes...
Caution: There are some recent images on the TOC ROFL web site that could be labelled NSFW. Found that out by accident when I was showing the site to students this morning.
Permalink to Comment6. Derek Lowe on January 31, 2013 2:23 PM writes...
#5 Anon - so there are! Of course, I'd say that the authors of the papers involved (or the editors who let these through) are the ones to blame. There's a famous graphical abstract of a host-guest complex (from, I think, the Rebek group) that I can't seem to find at the moment, but was a landmark in "How did they publish that?" moments.
Permalink to Comment7. Bender on January 31, 2013 2:45 PM writes...
While I'm always surprised at just how inept reviewers seem at letting some of these images through, I still would never have believed that "An In-Depth Analysis of a Piece of Shit" would ever be approved. This certainly doesn't do anything to help the movement towards open access journals (and PLOS nonetheless!)
Permalink to Comment8. David Formerly Known as a Chemist on January 31, 2013 2:50 PM writes...
Perhaps the molecule is shown coming out the backside of the liver...hepatic enzymes can create some funky metabolites you know! Pentavalent carbons, pentavalent nitrogens, disembodies sulfur atoms...why not!
Permalink to Comment9. luysii on January 31, 2013 2:55 PM writes...
Well many of the liver monster's teeth are P450 cytochromes, which happily chew up nearly all the xenobiotics (trans. drugs) you guys throw at it.
Chemists have now taught the old P450 dog a very new trick. They've made it the catalyst for sterospecific cyclopropanation of various styrene derivatives.
https://luysii.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/making-an-enzyme-do-a-carbene-reaction/
Permalink to Comment10. Da Vinci on January 31, 2013 3:15 PM writes...
Any authors and editors involved in such nonsense should be forever excluded from any publications. I mean, seriously? Is this science or a children's book? Ridiculous.
Permalink to Comment11. Crimso on January 31, 2013 3:42 PM writes...
Bender:
"help the movement"
I see what you did there.
Permalink to Comment12. Crimso on January 31, 2013 3:48 PM writes...
I have standing advice for all of my biochemistry students. When confronted with a question that begins "In what organ..." and you are reduced to purely guessing, always guess liver.
Permalink to Comment13. MoMo on January 31, 2013 4:36 PM writes...
What do you expect from Pfizer Europe? Not only is it from Pfizer, it is from Europe!
They must sit around all day and draw anthropomorphosized pics of organs instead of real work, but who could blame them?
Permalink to Comment14. Blabla on January 31, 2013 5:04 PM writes...
Oh great. Some pointless Europe bashing. Upstart colonials can't handle not being the source of civilisation?
Permalink to Comment15. Mahatma Gandhi on January 31, 2013 5:20 PM writes...
Western civilization would be...a good idea.
Permalink to Comment16. Anonymous on January 31, 2013 7:36 PM writes...
A totally useless review article. This topic has been reviewed countless of times.
@13: It's Pfizer USA (Groton and Cambridge), not Europe.
I bet this paper was rejected in US-based journal, though.
Permalink to Comment17. @MoMo & Blabla on January 31, 2013 7:41 PM writes...
According to their respective contact information, the authors are from Pfizer sites in Rotten, CT and the People's Republic of Cambridge, MA. Perhaps we shouldn't expect too much from Pfizer and its new troupe of "designer chemists".
Permalink to Comment18. Anonymous on February 1, 2013 2:05 AM writes...
Ummmmmmmm, isn't the co-editor in chief of the journal in question also Worldwide Head of Med Chem at Pfizer?
Permalink to Comment19. MoMo on February 4, 2013 12:04 PM writes...
Ye Gods! Is there no end to Pfizer's self-destruction? Pentavalent carbons!
Permalink to Comment