Excellent review of current PD research from the industry / investors' perspective. Also includes a more balanced account of GDNF research history than found in most other news articles. This author seems to have done his homework.

from: Seeking Alpha:

Treating Parkinson’s Disease - Investment Opportunities and Challenges

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1532...and-challenges

excerpt from article:
" Beyond solving scientific and clinical issues, another challenge facing biotechnology companies developing promising PD therapies is obtaining the funding necessary to continue the preclinical studies and clinical trials. In the current economic environment, some companies will not have the capital to move these product candidates forward and will discontinue development unless they have access to capital through financing or collaborations."

"...Treatment of PD represents a critical unmet medical need that may be addressed by the aforementioned technologies. Current medications only address the symptoms of this debilitating disease and do not halt the progression of PD. As demonstrated by the significant increase in Impax Pharmaceuticals’ stock price since the initiation of its Phase 3 trial, recent advances in drug delivery, the promise of gene therapy, and the
discovery of novel neurotrophic factors may encourage investment in biotechnology companies developing novel therapies that ease the symptoms of PD, slow disease progression, or offer hope to cure the disease"

Hope he's right about this....
linda

i don't know the answer to shortening the lenth of time it takes to produce a "public good" product - currently it takes at least 14 years. Then if the treatment actually gets approved, the company only has so many years left on its' patent to make money back on it. This is not hard to understand. Me too drugs made it because they are similar to the "gold standard" - l-dopa. DBS is also similar but terrifyingly risky.

other treatments don't show drama and are dropped. we are still defining what we have [what is pd?]

But they are deciding what to fund and how to run the trials. Here's where patients must be included IMHO. And,for the millionth time, when you get something that [i don't care if it was only some of them - there were explanations for some of those it didn't work for or got harmless antibodies - namely dislodged catheters]worked as well as gdnf, you don't withhold it and then expect us to trust.

Sheryl, you don't have to respond if this makes you uncomfortable, but what is your impression of why the DOR never quite makes it to the light of day in a bigger way?

paula