Me Too Drugs: R&D Innovations or Imitations?

Me Too Drugs: R&D Innovations or Imitations?

ACS Webinars: Professional Growth Channel


Me Too Drugs: R&D Innovations or Imitations? A short presentation followed by Q&A with speaker Dr. Joe DiMasi of Tufts University.




A “me too” drug is similar in chemical structure or has the same mechanism of action as the protype. According to the 2004 FDA report, only about one-third of the drug license application approvals over the preceding eight years were considered as ‘new’. What are the merits of these look-alikes? Is the pharmaceuticals industry providing enhanced therapeutic options or creating wasteful resources? Bring your ideas and join us to get your dose of me too analysis with speaker, Joe DiMasi, of Tufts University! Join us LIVE to have YOUR questions answered!


Download Presentation Slides!




What You Will Learn

  • Trends in the Speed of Competitive Entry in Drug Classes
  • Knock-offs or Win, Place, and Show: Are Me-Toos Copycats or Losers in a Development Race?
  • First-in-Class versus Me-Toos: Who Develops and Who Patents First?
  • Are First-in-Class Drugs Always Best-in-Class?
  • And much more…


Webinar Details

Date: Thursday, April 14, 2011

Time: 2:00-3:00 pm ET

Fee: Free


Meet Your Experts

Dr. DiMasi has been at the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development since 1987.  The Center is an independent non-profit multidisciplinary research organization affiliated with Tufts University.  Prior to joining the Tufts Center, Dr. DiMasi was a member of the Department of Economics at the College of the Holy Cross.  He received his Ph.D. in Economics from Boston College in 1984. Dr. DiMasi has served on the editorial boards of several research journals, has published in a variety of economic, medical, and scientific journals, and has presented his research at numerous professional and industry conferences.  He testified before the U.S. Congress in hearings leading up to enactment of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997.


Dr. Isabelle Morize is a Lead Generation to Candidate Realization (LGCR) business coordinator at Sanofi-Aventis.  She has 24 years experience working in the Molecular Modeling and Structural Biology field as scientist and manager in both France and the US.  Dr. Morize received her doctorate in Physics at the University of Paris VII.




The Fine Print

ACS Webinars™ does not endorse any products or services. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenters and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the American Chemical Society.


4 Responses to “Me Too Drugs: R&D Innovations or Imitations?”

  1. David R. Langley says:

    While it may make good press we should be very careful in what we call a “me too drug”. The replacement of a hydrogen with a fluorine, for example, can profoundly impact the physical chemical properties, metabolic stability, distribution, etc., or have no impact. In drug discovery a picture is not always worth a 1000 words. Only new molecules that offer repeated/measurable benefit over an existing drug should be advanced to the clinic. We should let the data speak not the headlines. This my own personal opinion.

  2. Sonia Khoja says:

    Aspirin is used for many years to treat heart disease but the mechanism of action is not yet known. Can this be a cause of resistance or reduction in its activity?

  3. Richard Gammans PhD MSM says:

    Refering to drugs of similar chemical structure and pharacology used for the same syndrome as “me-to” based only on those facts denies the value of incremental improvements to overall outcome. Take NSIDS for pain from butazolidin to celebrex. Both are “effective” on pain scores, but differ on how often they are taken, how long patients can take them without treatment-limiting side effects, and frequency of GI effects, particularly severe GI effects. Drugs of any sort don’t work unless patients actually remember to take them regularly s required, and are willing and able too without more new problems than benefit. This idea also requires that you beleive that the first transformational new treatment is perfect and can’t be improved which is very unlikely. Those beliefs are more political or commercial by the press than factual, scientific or medical. REG

  4. Albert Palomer says:

    Following Dr David R. Langley comment on “mee too drugs, … let the data speak not the headlines” (April 4, 2011 at 9:18 am), I fully agree that looking at the picture does not always reveal relevant differences and the example of the fluorine is critical. Modification of lifetime of compounds with slight (F is not that big!) modifications in metabolically critical points can render (or not) a dramatic change in a drug profile. In our experience we have taken advantage of F replacement to produce improved drugs in the area of insomnia-sleep disorders. AP

Leave a Comment


7 + = 12