Advertisement

New Technologies for Application to Veterinary Therapeutics

  • Jim E. RiviereEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology book series (HEP, volume 199)

Abstract

The purpose of this contribution is to review new technologies and make an educated prediction as to how they will impact veterinary pharmacology over the coming decades. By examining past developments, it becomes evident that change is incremental and predictable unless either a transforming discovery or a change in societal behaviour occurs. In the last century, both discoveries and behaviours have dramatically changed medicine, pharmacology and therapeutics. In this chapter, the potential effects of six transforming technologies on veterinary therapeutics are examined: continued advances in computer technology, microfluidics, nanotechnology, high-throughput screening, control and targeted drug delivery and pharmacogenomics. These should lead to the more efficacious and safer use of existing medicants, and the development of novel drugs across most therapeutic classes through increases in our knowledge base, as well as more efficient drug development. Although this growth in technology portends major advances over the next few decades, economic and regulatory constraints must still be overcome for these new drugs or therapeutic approaches to become common practise.

Keywords

Future Nanotechnology Pharmacokinetics Pharmacology Toxicology Veterinary medicine 

References

  1. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen L, Higby GJ (1995) The spirit of voluntarism. A legacy of commitment and contribution. The United States Pharmacopeia 1820–1899. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  3. Baynes RE, Xia XR, Imram M, Riviere JE (2008) Quantification of chemical mixture interactions that modulate dermal absorption using a multiple membrane coated fiber array. Chem Res Toxicol 21:591–599CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Booker R, Boysen E (2005) Nanotechnology for dummies. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Buur J, Baynes R, Smith G, Riviere J (2006) Use of probabilistic modeling within a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model to predict sulfamethazine residue withdrawal times in edible tissues in swine. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 50:2344–2351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Buur JL, Baynes RE, Riviere JE (2008) Estimating meat withdrawal times in pigs exposed to melamine contaminated feed using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model. Reg Toxicol Pharmacol 51:324–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Craigmill AL (2003) A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for oxytetracycline residues in sheep. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 26:55–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Cunningham MJ (2000) Genomics and proteomics: The new millennium of drug discovery and development. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 44:291–300CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Davis LE (1982) Veterinary Pharmacology – An Introduction to the Discipline. In: Booth NJ, McDonald LE (eds) Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 5th edn. Iowa State University Press, AmesGoogle Scholar
  10. Elkins S (ed) (2007) Computational toxicology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Enserink M (2007) Initiative aims to merge animal and human health science to benefit both. Science 316:1553CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ette EI, Williams PJ (eds) (2007) Pharmacometrics: the science of quantitative pharmacology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Fodor SP, Read JL, Pirrung MC, Stryer L, Lu AT, Solas D (1991) Light-directed, spatially addressable parallel chemical synthesis. Science 251:767–773CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Food and Drug Administration (2009) Center for Veterinary Medicine. Three-Year Research Plan. Food and Drug Administration, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  15. Greenwald RB (2001) PEG drugs: an overview. J Control Release 74:159–171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hsieh Y, Korfmacher WA (2006) Increasing speed and throughput when using HPLC-MS/MS systems for drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic screening. Curr Drug Metab 7:479–489CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones LM (1977) Veterinary Pharmacology – Past, Present, and Future. In: Jones LM, Booth NJ, McDonald LE (eds) Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 4th edn. Iowa State University Press, AmesGoogle Scholar
  18. Khavari PA, Rollman O, Vahlquist A (2002) Cutaneous gene transfer for skin and systemic diseases. J Intern Med 252:1–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim L, Vahey MD, Lee HY, Voldman J (2006) Microfluidic arrays for logarithmically perfused embryonic stem cell cultures. Lab Chip 6:394–406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kitano H (2002) Systems biology: a brief overview. Science 295:1662–1664CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lagoni LS, Hetts S, Butler CS (1994) The human animal bond and grief. Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  22. Langer R (2001) Drugs on target. Science 293:58–59CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Leduc PR, Wong MS, Ferreira PM, Groff RE, Haslinger K, Koonce M, Lee WY, Love JC, McCammon JA, Monteiro-Riviere NA, Rotello VM, Rubloff GW, Westervelt R, Yoda M (2007) Towards an in vivo biologically inspired nanofactory. Nat Nanotech 2:3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee HA, Leavens T, Mason SE, Monteiro-Riviere NA, Riviere JE (2009) Comparison of quantum dot biodistribution with blood-flow limited physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model. Nano Lett 9:794–799CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Manz A, Grabe N, Widmer HM (1990) Miniaturized total chemical analysis systems: a novel concept for chemical sensing. Sens Actuators B :244–248Google Scholar
  26. Martin-Jimenez T, Riviere JE (1998) Population pharmacokinetics in veterinary medicine. Potential uses for therapeutic drug monitoring and prediction of tissue residues. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 21:167–189CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. McClain MA, Culbertson CT, Jacobson SC, Allbritton NL, Sims CE, Ramsey JM (2003) Microfluidic devices for high-throughput chemical analysis of cells. Anal Chem 75:5646–5655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Mealey KL (2004) Therapeutic implications of the MDR-1 gene. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 27:257–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Monteiro-Riviere NA, Tran L (eds) (2007) Nanotoxicology: characterization, dosing and health effects. Informa, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. National Research Council (2001) Scientific criteria to ensure safe food. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  31. National Research Council (2006) A matter of size – triennial review of the national nanotechnology initiative. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  32. National Research Council (2007) Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  33. National Research Council (2009) Review of the federal strategy for nanotechnology-related environmental. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, Health and Safety ResearchGoogle Scholar
  34. Nellemann C, MacDevette M, Manders T, Eickhout B, Svihus B, Prins AG, Kaltenborn BP (eds) (2009) The Environmental Food Crisis: The Environment’s Role in Averting Future Food Crises – A UNEP Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme, ArendalGoogle Scholar
  35. Overall K (2001) Pharmacological treatment in behavioural medicine. Vet J 162:9–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Parascandola J (1992) The Development of American Pharmacology: John J. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Abel and the Shaping of a DisciplineGoogle Scholar
  37. Rantanen J (2007) Process analytical applications of Raman spectroscopy. J Pharm Pharmacol 59:171–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Reddy MB, Yang RSH, Clewell HJ, Andersen ME (eds) (2005) Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling. Science and applications. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Rhee SW, Taylor AM, Tu CH, Cribbs DH, Cotman CW, Jeon NL (2005) Patterned cell culture inside microfluidic devices. Lab Chip 5:102–107CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Riviere JE (ed) (2006) Biological concepts and techniques in toxicology. Taylor and Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Riviere JE (2007) The future of veterinary therapeutics: A glimpse towards 2030. Vet J 174:462–471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Riviere JE (2009) Pharmacokinetics of nanomaterials: an overview of carbon nanotubes, fullerenes and quantum dots. WIRES Nanomed Nanobiotech 1:26–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Riviere JE, Heit M (1997) Electrically-assisted transdermal drug delivery. Pharm Res 14:691–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Riviere JE, Papich M (2001) Potential and problems of developing transdermal patches for veterinary applications. Adv Drug Del Rev 50:175–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Riviere JE, Papich M (eds) (2009) Veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics, 9th edn. Wiley-Blackwell, IA, AmesGoogle Scholar
  46. Rudenko L, Greenlees KJ, Matheson JC (2006) Risk-based approaches to foods derived from genetically engineered animals. In: Riviere JE (ed) Biological concepts and techniques in toxicology. Taylor and Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Ryman-Rasmussen J, Riviere JE, Monteiro-Riviere NA (2007) Variables influencing interactions of untargeted quantum dot nanoparticles with skin cells and identification of biochemical modulators. NanoLetters 7:1344–1348Google Scholar
  48. Schena M, Shalon D, Davis RW, Brown PO (1995) Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a complimentary DNA microarray. Science 270:467–470CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Semizarov D, Blomme E (eds) (2009) Genomics in drug discovery and development. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  50. Service RF (2005) Nanotechnology takes aim at cancer. Science 310:1132–1134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Sillence MN (2004) Technologies for the control of fat and lean deposition in livestock. Vet J 167:242–257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Verbaan FJ, Bal SM, van den Berg DJ, Groenink WH, Verpoorten H, Luttge R, Bouwstra JA (2007) Assembled microneedle arrays enhance the transport of compounds varying over a large range of molecular weight across human dermatomed skin. J Control Release 12:238–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wen X, Fuhrman S, Michaels GS, Carr DB, Smith S, Barker JL, Somogyi R (1998) Large-scale temporal gene expression mapping of central nervous system development. PNAS 95:334–339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Widera G, Johnson J, Kim L, Libiran L, Nyam K, Daddona PE, Cormier M (2006) Effect of delivery parameters on immunization to ovalbumin following intracutaneous administration of a coated microneedle array patch system. Vaccine 24:1653–1664CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Wren JA, Gossellin J, Sunderland SJ (2007) Dirlotapide: a review of its properties and role in the management of obesity in dogs. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 30(Suppl 1):11–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Xia XR, Baynes RE, Monteiro-Riviere NA, Riviere JE (2007) An experimental based approach for predicting skin permeability of chemicals and drugs using a membrane coated fiber array. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 221:320–328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Yengi LG, Leung L, Kao J (2007) The evolving role of drug metabolism in drug discovery and development. Pharm Res 24:842–858CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Chemical Toxicology Research and Pharmacokinetics, Department of Population Health and PathobiologyCollege of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations