4.7 Article

US FDA Approved Drugs from 2015-June 2020: A Perspective

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 64, Issue 5, Pages 2339-2381

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.0c01786

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. SERB [EMR/2017/002702]
  2. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  3. Syngene International Limited

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compiled and analyzed 245 drugs approved by the U.S. FDA from 2015 to June 2020, focusing on cancer, infectious diseases, neurological conditions, and genetic, metabolic, cardiovascular disorders. The analysis also looked at the structural, elemental, and functional group diversity among the approved drugs, as well as drug-likeness for the approved drugs.
In the present work, we report compilation and analysis of 245 drugs, including small and macromolecules approved by the U.S. FDA from 2015 until June 2020. Nearly 29% of the drugs were approved for the treatment of various types of cancers. Other major therapeutic areas of focus were infectious diseases (14%); neurological conditions (12%); and genetic, metabolic, and cardiovascular disorders (7-8% each). Itemization of the approved drugs according to the year of approval, sponsor, target, chemical class, major drug-metabolizing enzyme(s), route of administration/elimination, and drug-drug interaction liability (perpetrator or/and victim) is presented and discussed. An effort has been made to analyze the pharmacophores to identify the structural (e.g., aromatic, heterocycle, and aliphatic), elemental (e.g., boron, sulfur, fluorine, phosphorus, and deuterium), and functional group (e.g., nitro drugs) diversity among the approved drugs. Further, descriptor-based chemical space analysis of FDA approved drugs and several strategies utilized for optimizing metabolism leading to their discoveries have been emphasized. Finally, an analysis of drug-likeness for the approved drugs is presented.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available