the pharmacologist june 2016
DESCRIPTION
Volume 58, Number 2, June 2016TRANSCRIPT
t h ePharmacologist
A Publication by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Vol. 58 • Number 2 • June 2016
Inside:Farewell Message from the President
2016 Annual Meeting in Review
Call for 2017 Award Nominations
Taxol: Barking Up the Right Tree
Message from the President
2016 Annual Meeting in Review
Call for 2017 Award Nominations
Feature Story: Taxol: Barking Up the Right Tree
Meeting News
Science Policy News
Education News
Journals News
Membership News Obituaries: Dale Louise Birkle Dreer
Nancy Rutledge Zahniser
Members in the News
Division News
Chapter News
Contents6769818496101107110112
118120130
The Pharmacologist is published and distributed by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. THE PHARMACOLOGIST
PRODUCTION TEAM
Rich DodenhoffCatherine L. Fry, PhDDana KauffmanJudith A. Siuciak, PhD Suzie Thompson
COUNCIL
President Kenneth E. Thummel, PhD
President-Elect David R. Sibley, PhD
Past President Annette E. Fleckenstein, PhD
Secretary/Treasurer Dennis C. Marshall, PhD
Secretary/Treasurer-Elect Charles P. France, PhD
Past Secretary/Treasurer Paul A. Insel, MD
Councilors Wayne Backes, PhD
John D. Schuetz, PhD
Margaret E. Gnegy, PhD
Chair, Board of Publications Trustees Mary E. Vore, PhD
Chair, Program Committee Scott Waldman, MD, PhD
FASEB Board Representative Brian M. Cox, PhD
Executive Officer Judith A. Siuciak, PhD
The Pharmacologist (ISSN 0031-7004) is published quarterly in March, June, September, and December by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3995. Annual subscription rates: $25.00 for ASPET members; $50.00 for U.S. nonmembers and institutions; $75.00 for nonmembers and institutions outside the U.S. Single copy: $25.00. Copyright © 2016 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics Inc. All rights reserved. Periodicals postage paid at Bethesda, MD. GST number for Canadian subscribers: BN:13489 2330 RT.
ASPET assumes no responsibility for the statements and opinions advanced by contributors to The Pharmacologist.
Postmaster: Send address changes to: The Pharmacologist, ASPET, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3995.
67
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Message from
The PresidentMy Fellow Pharmacologists,
With the close of another highly successful ASPET Annual Meeting at Experimental Biology (EB) in San Diego in April,
my term as President of the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET) is coming to an
end. I think we have accomplished much together that I hope has strengthened the society and helped secure its future.
At the outset, I want to thank Dr. Judy Siuciak, ASPET Executive Officer, and all of the ASPET office staff for their superb
and dedicated attention to the operations of the society, including most importantly the Experimental Biology meeting,
and the support that they provided to me during the past 12 months.
Some of the accomplishments that I would like to highlight played out at EB2016. They include an increase in the
number of travel awards made to post-doctoral fellows, graduate and undergraduate students, some of which were
supported by the BIG IDEAS project on Enhancing Undergraduate Engagement in ASPET at EB Meetings, an initiative led
by Dr. Carol Beck and Dr. Catherine Davis. Enhancing the attendance of young scientists at EB is one way in which ASPET
can support their careers and foster a lasting relationship between them and the society. An ASPET Mentoring Network
was established and, at EB2016, there was an inaugural meeting/workshop of “coaches” and “mentees” that is part of
the funded BIG IDEAS project – From Senior Mentor to Highly Skilled Career Coach: A Novel Approach to Breaking the
Diversity Roadblock, led by Dr. Lynn Wecker and Dr. Susan Ingram. ASPET is also launching this Summer the Pharmacology
Industry Internships for PhD Students (PIIPS) program, which will be overseen by ASPET staff with support from Dr. Kay
Meier and a PIIPS steering committee. This program is intended to provide graduate students with an industry-based
research experience that can help shape critical career decisions. In addition, during its Spring meeting at EB2016, ASPET
Council approved funding of a new BIG IDEAS initiative, Surmounting the Insurmountable: Obstacles in Drug Discovery
and Development – Real World Case Studies. It will be led by Dr. Kan He, Dr. Tom Woolf and Dr. Paul Hollenberg, as well as
other members from the academic and industrial communities. A major goal of this new initiative will be to teach beginning
pharmacologists, through discussion of case studies, how to think critically to solve biochemical, pharmacological and
pharmaceutical problems that can arise during the discovery and development of new therapeutic agents.
Other educational and mentoring events at EB2016 that bear mentioning include the Undergraduate Research:
Cultivating the Next Generation of Researchers Through SURF and Beyond Symposium, with presentations from
current institutional SURF directors, individual mentors and truly inspiring talks by past recipients of a SURF award
(Natalie Arabian, USC; Chelesa Fearce, Spelman College; and Michael Little, UNC-Chapel Hill) who clearly illustrate how
transformative this form of financial support and mentoring can be for emerging young research scientists. Of note,
the ASPET SURF program has been in existence since 1992 (25th anniversary in 2017) and has supported research
experiences for over 2000 undergraduates. A SURF task force was formed last year to evaluate its performance
outcomes and to chart future directions; early results of that analysis suggest remarkable success in fostering careers
in the allied health sciences, including pharmacology. ASPET also held for the first time at EB2016 the Undergraduate
Networking and Career Development Luncheon, with presentations by Dr. Janet Clark, director for fellowship training
at the National Institutes of Mental Health and Dr. Alexandra Newton, professor of pharmacology at the University
of California, San Diego. The Graduate Student-Postdoctoral Colloquium featured a provocative and well-received
presentation by Dr. Rick McGee, associate dean for faculty recruitment and professional development at Northwestern
University, on “Mentoring Your Mentor.”
68
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
EB2016 also marked the inaugural in-person meeting of the ASPET Young Scientists Committee (YSC), led by
Dr. Karen Tonsfeldt, and predoc/post-doc members representing a variety of divisions and other committees. This
committee was formed to give young pharmacologists a stronger voice in setting the agenda of our society and to
provide them with opportunities for leadership and career development. One of the first accomplishments of the
committee was the development and submission of symposium proposals to be considered for EB2017 programming.
They also reached out to their brethren attending EB2016, through the YSC Photo Booth, to build camaraderie among
the young scientists attending the meeting and elicit feedback for focusing future efforts of the committee in the coming
year. One of the ideas that is being considered is a plan for the Young Scientists Committee and the Mentoring and
Career Development Committee to collaborate on an outreach event for the local (Chicago) K-12 and undergraduate
community to foster an interest in the sciences, a basic understanding of the field of pharmacology, and how research in
this area can benefit society.
Each of these educational and mentoring initiatives and EB events benefited greatly from the superb support and
leadership of Dr. Catherine Fry and Carla Burns in the ASPET office, and were implemented as part of a long-term
strategy that I supported at the outset of my presidency to foster development of the next generation of pharmacologists
and leaders of ASPET.
For those of you who couldn’t make the EB meeting this year, we were delighted to help celebrate the 50th
anniversary of PhRMA by recognizing during the Business Meeting their long history of financial support for ASPET
members (specifically its young scientists) and reminiscing on that incredible relationship during a joint reception that
followed. The San Diego weather that evening was wonderful, as advertised, and contributed to an incredible ambience
and heightened level of enthusiasm for events that took place over the next four days. As always, the EB meeting was
filled with stimulating lectures from society members and other invited speakers, in particular those special presentations
given by winners of the major ASPET society awards.
As President of ASPET, I was honored to host the Presidential Symposium on a topic of personal scientific interest –
Precision Medicine in Anti-Cancer Pharmacology. Read more about this event on page 74.
Introduction of the BIG IDEAS initiatives during the last year, with their focus on education and mentoring of the next
generation of pharmacology leaders, prompted further introspection by Council and resulted in a decision to embark
on a thorough and comprehensive strategic planning process that will determine who we are, where we want to be
in the next 5 and 10 years, and how we will get there. This challenging but necessary exercise will be overseen by my
successors, Dave Sibley (president-elect) and John Schuetz (president-elect-elect), our Executive Officer Judy Siuciak,
and the rest of ASPET Council and office staff. I strongly encourage you to participate in our strategic planning when
called upon for input through planned surveys and other data collection and feedback mechanisms.
In closing, I want to express to the ASPET membership my sincere thanks for bestowing on me the distinct honor to
serve as president of the Society. It has been an incredible experience, one filled with wonderful memories that I will
cherish always.
Kenneth E. Thummel
ASPET President
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
This year’s business meeting took place on
Saturday, April 2 led by President Ken Thummel from
the University of Washington. Dr. Thummel updated
members on the Society’s current activities, programs,
and initiatives. Highlights from his presentation
included:
• The Otto Krayer Award
• An update on the member-driven BIG IDEAS
initiatives
• A summary of ongoing global pharmacology
partnerships
• A review of the ASPET Summer Undergraduate
Research Fellowship (SURF) program
• ASPET’s increased undergraduate opportunities
• Highlights of the EB2016 meeting including
the inaugural programming for the Division for
Cancer Pharmacology
• Improved member communications
A report on ASPET’s financial status was presented
by Secretary/Treasurer Dennis Marshall, and a
presentation on ASPET’s journals was given by Board
of Publications Trustees Chair Mary Vore. Directly
following the business agenda, Dr. Thummel was
honored to present awards to this year’s scientific
achievement award winners and travel award winners.
2016 ANNUAL MEETING
The ASPET Annual Meeting at Experimental Biology 2016 took place on April 2–6, 2016 in San Diego, CA. With over 12,000 attendees at EB, members enjoyed a successful meeting experience with an excellent scientific program and great networking and social events.
IN REVIEW
Incoming President David Sibley thanks President Ken Thummel for his services.
69
70
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
70
“Thank you for organizing such a great meeting. It was amazing.”
–Peggy Gnegy
(1) 2016 ASPET Scientific Achievement Award Winners
(2) 2016 P.B. Dews Lifetime Achievement Award winners Roy W. Pickens and Travis Thompson with President Ken Thummel.
(3) 2016 Undergraduate Student Travel Award Winners
(4) 2016 ASPET Graduate Student Travel Award Winners
(5) 2016 ASPET Young Scientist Travel Award Winners
(6) 2016 Washington Fellows
(7) 2016 Mentoring Network participants
5
3
6
2
1
4
7
71
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
71 71
This year’s opening reception was held
jointly with the PhRMA foundation to honor their
50th anniversary. Over 400 people gathered in
the open terrace of the San Diego Convention
Center to celebrate the start of the annual
meeting. Members enjoyed great food, perfect
San Diego weather, and a lively atmosphere to
catch up with old and new friends.
President Ken Thummel pres-ents a 50 year anniversary gift to PhRMA Foundation’s Eileen Cannon and Terry Bowlin.
2016 ASPET Opening Reception
The ASPET booth in the exhibit hall was
very successful this year. We recruited 70
new members, including 8 regular members,
3 postdoc members, 41 graduate student
members, and 18 undergraduate student
members. We also offered a new t-shirt for
sale in our store, which was our highest selling
item. If you didn’t get a chance to purchase an
ASPET product at the meeting, you can make
purchases online at www.aspet.org/store.
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
72
New this year, the ASPET member lounge was
a huge hit with members in the session hall. We
offered members morning coffee, free Wi-Fi, and a
place to relax between sessions. The Meet-a-Mentor
sessions, Meet-the-Editor sessions, and the ASPET
Young Scientist Committee’s photo booth were
hosted in the lounge.
Meet-a-Mentor session in the member lounge
Meet-the-Editor session in the member lounge
The 2016 Student and Postdoctoral Poster
Competition gave students and young scientists an
opportunity to present their work in a lively and fun
atmosphere. ASPET divisions held their competitions
simultaneously and allowed students to talk about their
work and network with senior members, colleagues,
and friends. The ASPET divisions presented their
award winners with cash prizes and award certificates.
To learn who won the division competitions, please
turn to the division news section on page 120.
Poster Competition
“I found it [the new members lounge] so helpful in catching my breath, organizing my thoughts and planning my next stop, as the week progressed.”
– Ken Thummel
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
73
The 2016 Dolores C.
Shockley Best Presentation
Awards were given out at
the Student and Postdoctoral
Poster Competition. Dr.
Shockley was the first African
American woman to earn a
PhD in pharmacology and the
first black woman appointed
to chair a pharmacology
department in the US.
In the graduate student category, prizes were awarded to Jenaye Robinson (1st) from Texas Southern University, Dominique Jones (2nd) from University of Louisville, and Antoinette Nelson (3rd) from Rutgers University. In the postdoctoral scientist category, prizes were awarded to Rheaclare Fraser-Spears (1st) from the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio and Inigo Valiente-Alandi (2nd) from the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center.
Following the poster competition, ASPET students
and postdocs socialized at the Student/Postdoc Mixer.
The mixer was packed with members dancing and
having fun with friends.
ASPET Student/ Postdoc Mixer
To view the full album
of EB2016 pictures,
visit us online at:
http://bit.ly/1rU8yeo
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
74
ASPET Presidential Symposium: Precision Medicine in Anti-Cancer Pharmacology
Annual Meeting Highlights
The ASPET Presidential
Symposium was held on Sunday, April
3 and chaired by Dr. Ken Thummel,
ASPET President, and Dr. Susan
Cole, chair of the newly constituted
Division for Cancer Pharmacology
(DCP); DCP was also a co-sponsor of
the symposium. We were incredibly
fortunate to have outstanding
presentations from Dr. Jun Yang at
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital
on Thiopurine Pharmacogenetics:
From Mechanism to Clinical Action;
Dr. Eileen Dolan at the University of
Chicago on Genome-Wide Studies
of Chemotherapeutic Associated
Toxicities; Dr. Mary-Ann Bjornsti at the
University of Alabama-Birmingham on
Yeast Phenomics: Lessons in Cancer
Therapy; and Dr. Liewei Wang at the Mayo Clinic on
Breast Cancer Pharmacogenomics: Application of
PDX Model. Each presentation highlighted how basic
discovery of the genetic and environmental basis for
inter-individual differences in drug efficacy and toxicity
might be harnessed and translated into prospective
tests that guide clinical decisions and improve the
outcomes of pharmacological interventions in the
treatment of cancer. This is a focus of the national
Precision Medicine Initiative and represents an
opportunity for pharmacology to shape the future of
medicine.
The next Presidential Symposium titled ASPET
Presidential Symposium: Leveraging New Paradigms
for GPCR Drug Discovery will be chaired by President-
Elect Dr. Dave Sibley. The symposium will be held at
the ASPET Annual Meeting at EB2017 in Chicago.
ASPET Journals Symposium: Hear It from the Editors—Navigating the Course through Journal Submission and Publication
EB 2016 saw the first symposium by ASPET’s
journals and co-sponsored by the Board of Publication
Trustees (BPT) and all of ASPET’s divisions. The
meeting was created as a practical guide for early-
career scientists and focused on publishing in ASPET’s
journals. The presentations highlighted how to write
a competitive manuscript, how to effectively deal with
rejection and revision decisions, and how publication
ethics and accountability, among other topics, are
applicable to publishing in all research journals. The
panel included current and recent editors of the
Society’s journals.
Mary Vore, professor emerita in the Department
of Toxicology and Cancer Biology at the University
ASPET President Ken Thummel, with speakers of the ASPET Presidential Symposium during the annual meeting at EB2016.
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
75
Speakers of the ASPET Journals Symposium, which took place Monday, April 4 during ASPET’s Annual Meeting at EB2016.
of Kentucky College of Medicine and chair of the
BPT, discussed how to choose a journal for your
manuscript. She noted the many competing journals
in pharmacology and related fields and highlighted
the advantages of publishing in one of the ASPET’s
journals. In examining the scope of each journal, Dr.
Vore showed the breadth of pharmacology research
published by the Society.
Michael F. Jarvis, Volwiler Senior Research Fellow
and senior scientific director at AbbVie Inc., served
as the editor of The Journal of Pharmacology and
Experimental Therapeutics from 2010 to 2015. He
addressed the question of how to write a competitive
manuscript. There are many resources available, and
researchers can benefit from seeking guidance from
their academic institutions, scientific societies, journals
themselves, and even commercial vendors. Guidelines
and checklists providing best practices are available
online and cover clinical and preclinical research.
He highlighted that many have been developed to
enhance the reproducibility of published research.
Dr. Jarvis described the elements that are critical to a
successful manuscript, which start with an important
and clear hypothesis. This should be supported by
dose-response determinations, positive and negative
controls, validated reagents, and sufficient power and
appropriate statistical analysis. A detailed and rigorous
analysis of the study’s results and limitations should
conclude the manuscript. His presentation went
through the sections of an article and examined the
purpose and goals of each as well as explaining the
effective use of figures and figure legends.
Edward T. Morgan, professor of pharmacology at
the Emory University School of Medicine and editor
of Drug Metabolism and Disposition spoke about
communicating experimental design and analysis
considerations. The lack of reproducibility of scientific
literature make clear the need to clearly, thoroughly,
and effectively present experimental design. Dr.
Morgan noted four causes of irreproducible results:
flawed science, bad reagents, bad reporting, and
biological variability. He went on to cite six red
flags that fall under one or more of these causes.
In addition, he noted the “fascination with P” which
include the problems of P-chasing or hacking
and the need to use P values with other data to
determine the significance of a finding. Dr. Morgan
showed how ASPET’s journals have responded to
these issues through rigorous requirements given
in the Instructions to Authors. These include specific
requirements for reporting animal and human
experiments. He concluded with clear, detailed
recommendations for designing experiments and
reporting them.
Stephen Traynelis is a professor in the Department
of Pharmacology at the Emory University School of
Medicine and editor of Molecular Pharmacology. His
presentation went step-by-step through the peer-
review process, explaining
what happens at each stage,
why negative decisions may
occur, and what avoidable
mistakes can lead to rapid
rejection. Dr. Traynelis
removed the mystery of the
peer review process with a
detailed guided tour through
what many researchers may
consider a hazardous journey.
He presented effective and
constructive ways to respond
to reviewer comments and an
invitation to resubmit with a
revised manuscript.
Rich Dodenhoff, ASPET’s
journals director, spoke about
authorship, accountability,
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
76
Meet-the-Experts Lunch: Careers in Translational and Clinical Pharmacology
During the ASPET Annual Meeting at Experimental
Biology 2016 in San Diego, the Division for
Translational and Clinical Pharmacology (TCP) hosted
its second special session aimed at connecting
trainees with experienced scientists to answer
questions and provide career advice. This “Meet-
the-Experts Lunch” featured clinical and translational
pharmacologists within the TCP Executive Committee
and ASPET, representing diverse careers in academia,
industry, and government, as follows:
• Pam Hornby - Senior Scientific Director and
Fellow, Janssen Research and Development, J&J
Adjunct Professor, Department of Pharmacology
and Physiology, Drexel University College of
Medicine, Chair of TCP and organizer of the Meet-
the-Experts Lunch at EB2016
• James Barrett - Director, Clinical and Translational
Research Institute; Professor, Department of
Pharmacology and Physiology, Drexel University
College of Medicine
• Thomas Beveridge - Associate Director, Clinical
Science, Medical Affairs, Ferring Pharmaceuticals
Inc.; Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department
of Physiology and Pharmacology, Wake Forest
School of Medicine
• Ross Corriden - Assistant Project Scientist,
Department of Pharmacology, University of
California, San Diego
• Benedict Green - Research Pharmacologist,
Poisonous Plant Research Laboratory ARS/USDA
• Michael Holinstat - Associate Professor,
Department of Pharmacology School of Medicine,
University of Michigan
• Dennis Marshall - Executive Director, Medical
Affairs, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
• Jeffrey Paul - Clinical Pharmacology Consultant;
Clinical Dev. Adjunct Faculty at Drexel University
College of Medicine
• Scott Waldman - Professor and Chair,
Department of Pharmacology and Experimental
Therapeutics, Thomas Jefferson University
More than 50 TCP and ASPET members attended
the invitation only event. The lunch opened with
each mentor providing a 3 minute summary of the
highlights of their career, with Dr. Hornby putting
ethics, and copyright. He began with the criteria
for authorship and explained that authorship ties
closely with accountability and ethics in scientific
publishing. In the vein of ethics, he addressed
image manipulation, discussing what is and is not
allowed. Resources about ethics and accountability
are numerous and include the Office of Research
Integrity and the US Department of Health and Human
Services, the International Committee of Medical
Journal Editors, and the Committee on Publications
Ethics. He spoke about copyright, starting with an
explanation that copyright happens automatically
when a work is created in a fixed, tangible form and
all that that implies in the reuse of published materials.
Copyright can present confusing problems, but
excellent resources are available, including circulars
from the US Copyright Office, your institution’s
librarians, and the Copyright Clearance Center.
The presentations were followed by a question
and answer period facilitated by David Sibley, former
editor of Pharmacological Reviews, and Darrell
Abernethy, editor-in-chief of Pharmacology Research
& Perspectives. Audience members and panelists
discussed the issues of revealing the names of
reviewers and depositing published papers with file-
sharing sites, among other topics.
All of the slides from the presentations are available
on ASPET’s website at http://bit.ly/1XrvqOc and include
links to resources. The Board of Publications Trustees
will follow up at next year’s meeting with a more in-
depth look at some of the topics discussed in these
presentations, perhaps incorporating more audience
interaction. Stay tuned!
“Thank you so much for the mentorship and guidance.”
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
77
them on the spot by asking for a single word to
describe themselves. There were very good personal
reflections that came out in those single words such
as “determined,” “lucky,” “biomedical,” “persistent,”
and “flexible,” which along with the brief career
histories, helped the participants to decide which
mentors to visit. The room was set up for trainees to
engage in personal discussions with different mentors.
Trainees made excellent use of the time with
questions such as:
• How is industry research different from academic
research?
• How do I get my foot in the door with industry,
should I stay in the same lab for my post-doc as my
PhD research?
• How important is it to publish exclusively in high
impact journals or is it more important to have many
publications in journals with less impact?
• How easy is it to transition
from an academic career to
becoming an entrepreneur?
• How to prepare for job
interviews in a different
environment that I am familiar
with?
All attendees gained insight into
the diversity of viewpoints on
where clinical and translational
pharmacology is headed and
different ways to prepare for
these careers. Mentors also
discussed additional training
requirements needed to
work as a successful clinical
pharmacologist.
The TCP Division is looking
forward to continuing this
“Meet-the-Experts” lunch series at next year’s
annual meeting in Chicago. There has already been
significant email follow up from those who attended,
suggesting that this event helped trainees to identify
and establish mentoring relationships. Interactions
via email and LinkedIn continued after the meeting.
We encourage interested trainees to consider
involvement in the TCP Executive Committee to add
diversity of membership as graduate or post-doctoral
representatives. Typically, trainee representatives
lead TCP communication efforts. Finally, in response
to many questions about exposure to different
research careers, the TCP Division has also invited
TCP and ASPET graduate and post-doctoral fellows to
apply for one day site visits to experience Executive
Committee places of work. The pilot program in the
summer of 2016 will host trainees at Janssen R&D,
LLC, Pennsylvania and the ARS/USDA Utah. The
TCP Division also put together a new internship
program in medical affairs at Ferring Pharmaceuticals
(Parsippany, NJ), and the inaugural year (2016)
program is currently in progress. Stay tuned for
further exciting opportunities to be initiated by the
TCP in future!
The Division for Translational and Clinical Pharmacology Meet-the-Experts Lunch was held Tuesday, April 5 during the ASPET Annual Meeting at EB2016.
“This was a great event! Thanks for organizing. I’m very pleased to see that there is follow-up as well.”
“I feel like your career path is closely aligned to what I’d like mine to look like.”
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
ASPET was excited to introduce the newly formed
Young Scientists Committee (YSC) at EB2016. The
mission of the YSC is to support the development of
future pharmacologists and ASPET members, and to
provide leadership experience to trainees in ASPET.
ASPET has a long and successful history of recruiting
and training young pharmacologists, and the goal of
the YSC is to further support these efforts by expanding
representation of trainees in committees, unifying
trainees among divisions, and communicating with
senior ASPET officers.
During the YSC’s inaugural year, the committee had
a number of accomplishments. The YSC worked with
the Science Policy, Mentoring and Career Development,
and Program Committees to have a YSC representative
on each. The YSC also submitted two postdoc-chaired
symposia proposals for EB2017, and all were highly
ranked in their respective divisions. It is the committee’s
goal to continue these efforts, and the YSC welcomes
ideas for future symposia. Members of the YSC also
proposed and staffed the photo booth at EB2016.
They got the word about YSC out to the 70 people
who stopped to get their pictures taken. Everyone who
participated had a great time, and the 17 YSC members
hope to see more attendees stop by next year!
Highlights of YSC member involvement at EB2016
include:
• 5 members earned ASPET travel awards
• 4 members were selected for the new Mentoring
Network: Coaching for Career Development
program
• 11 posters were presented
• 1 poster won an award
• 9 members served as poster competition judges
• 5 members were division platform speakers and 4
were presentation winners
• 8 members served as ASPET/Division committee
representatives
• 2 members received other societal (non-ASPET)
awards
• 2 members served as division symposia co-chairs
In the first face-to-face committee meeting at
EB2016, many new, exciting ideas were discussed
for the upcoming year. The YSC’s visions include
developing a mentoring system for junior students
and first-time attendees at EB, performing community
outreach in Chicago
for the 2017 meeting,
spearheading a trainee-
centered symposium
at EB2018, and
implementing an easy
way to help trainees
identify career
opportunities at the
meeting. Senior
leadership at ASPET
is excited about the committee’s
efforts, and the YSC hopes to have their
continued support for its activities moving forward. Stay
tuned for further details!
Next year at EB2017 in Chicago, a planned effort
between the YSC and the Mentoring and Career
Development Committee will focus on community
outreach to foster communication between scientists and
the lay public. This activity is still under development, but
the YSC welcomes participation and suggestions from all
ASPET members in this effort. YSC members encourage
the involvement of all who are interested!
The YSC will be recruiting interested graduate
students and postdocs for the committee in 2017.
Please share your thoughts, enthusiasm, and ideas for
the YSC by contacting Karen Tonsfeldt, YSC chair, via
78
Debut of the Young Scientists Committee at EB2016
Attendees enjoying the Young Scientists Committee photo booth.
79
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
• 1,072 cups of coffee consumed
• 36 yellow mums added color
• 81 places to sit and relax within the lounge
• 144 unique WiFi users on opening day
• 2:00PM - 3:00PM – highest
average number of people in lounge daily
• 10:00AM - 11:00AM Tuesday
– greatest attendance in lounge
ASPET debuts the new member lounge
58 educational and scientific sessions were presented over 5 days Most Attended Sessions:
1. Graduate Student - Postdoctoral Colloquium: Mentoring Your Mentor: Key Skills for Effective Mentoring Relationships with Shared Responsibility
2. Invited Lecture: RhoA in Focus: Pathways from GPCRs to Disease
3. Paul M. Vanhoutte Distinguished Lectureship in Vascular Pharmacology
4. Julius Axelrod Award in Pharmacology Lecture: Therapies of Brain Diseases, Past, Present and Future
5. Invited Symposium: GPCR and RhoA as Mediators of Disease
6. Newly Recognized GPCRs in Health, Disease and as Therapeutic Targets
Fun Meeting Facts
80
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
ASPET attendees at EB represented
37 different countries
ASPET draws pharmacology enthusiasts from around the world!
• 9,817 total mobile app users
• 7 ASPET symposia in overall top 10% viewed on mobile app
• ASPET booth in top 10% of booths viewed on the mobile app
EB attendees embrace technology
Top 3 ASPET items purchased
New “Experiment. Fail. Learn. Repeat.” t-shirt
Einstein t-shirt
Plush ASPET donkey
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
ASPET is dedicated to recognizing the best research in, contributions to, and accomplishments in all
areas of pharmacology. We encourage members to nominate deserving scientists to raise awareness of the
outstanding work being done in our field.
The John J.
Abel Award in
Pharmacology
is presented
for original,
outstanding
research in
the field of
pharmacology and/or experimental
therapeutics by a candidate who
is younger than 45. This award,
named after the founder of ASPET,
was established in 1946 to stimulate
fundamental research in pharmacology
and experimental therapeutics by
young investigators.
The Julius
Axelrod Award
in Pharmacology
is presented
for significant
contributions to
understanding
the biochemical
mechanisms underlying the
pharmacological actions of drugs
and for contributions to mentoring
other pharmacologists. This award
was established in 1991 to honor the
memory of the eminent American
pharmacologist who shaped the fields
of neuroscience, drug metabolism,
and biochemistry and who served
as a mentor for numerous eminent
pharmacologists around the world.
The Otto Krayer
Award in
Pharmacology
is presented to
commemorate the
enduring legacy
of Otto Krayer’s
personal qualities:
his ethical behavior, his commitment to
teaching, his high standards of scientific
scholarship, publication, and editorship,
his promotion of interdisciplinary
research to reveal the actions of drugs
or other chemicals, and his guidance
and support of younger scientists. The
purpose of the award is to recognize an
individual whose character and career
contributions to pharmacology are in
accord with those exemplified
by Otto Krayer. More information on Otto Krayer.
ASPET Scientific Achievement Awards
81
Who can submit a nomination?
You must be an ASPET member to submit
nominations. For the Lehr Award, self-nominations from
ASPET members are permitted.
Who is eligible to receive awards?
Scientists from all over the world and at all career
stages are eligible for ASPET’s various awards. Learn
more about the specific eligibility details for each
award at http://www.aspet.org/awards/.
How do you submit a nomination?
To nominate someone, visit: http://www.aspet.org/
awards/. Review the award criteria and nomination
requirements. Then log in as a member and select “Go
to Awards Portal” to be routed to the nomination forms.
When are nominations due?
The deadline for nominations is Thursday,
September 15, 2016 at 5:00 EDT.
What happens next?
Each nomination is reviewed by all members of
the award’s designated award committee. Scores and
rankings are given, and compiled results are discussed
by the committee, leading to the final selection of the
2017 awardee.
Now Accepting 2017 Award Nominations
ASPET Awards
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
82
ASPET Division Sponsored Awards
The David Lehr Research Award
is intended to extend funding for
preclinical or clinical research directed
toward improving human health.
This award is made possible by an
endowment to ASPET from Mrs. Lisa
Lehr in honor of her husband, the late
Dr. David Lehr, former chair of the
Department of Pharmacology of New York Medical College.
It includes two years of funding at $50,000 per year.
The Reynold Spector Award in Clinical
Pharmacology recognizes excellence
in research and/or teaching in clinical
pharmacology. It was established in
recognition of Dr. Spector’s dedication and
contributions to clinical pharmacology.
The Robert R. Ruffolo Career
Achievement Award in
Pharmacology honors the scientific
achievements of scientists who are at
the height of their careers (typically
mid-to late-career) and who have
made significant contributions to any
area of pharmacology. This award
recognizes the contributions made to drug discovery and
development by Dr. Ruffolo.
The Pharmacia-ASPET Award in
Experimental Therapeutics recognizes
and stimulates outstanding research
in pharmacology and experimental
therapeutics, basic laboratory, or clinical
research that has had, or potentially
will have, a major impact on the
pharmacological treatment of disease.
Sponsored by the ASPET Division for
Drug Metabolism
The ASPET Division for Drug Metabolism
Early Career Achievement Award has
been established to recognize excellent
original research by early career investi-
gators in the area of drug metabolism and
disposition. The awardee will deliver a lecture at the ASPET
Annual Meeting at EB2017 and will be invited to publish a
review article in Drug Metabolism and Disposition.
Sponsored by the ASPET Division
for Neuropharmacology
The ASPET Division for Neuropharmacolo-
gy Early Career Independent Investigator
Award recognizes and honors a young
investigator who is working in any area of
Neuropharmacology. The award is open to
early career stage investigators from all types of organiza-
tions, including academia, industry, private, or government
institutes.
Sponsored by the ASPET Division
for Toxicology
The ASPET Division for Toxicology will
present three awards to recognize
outstanding research contributions to
toxicology by members at various career
stages. The awards include the Career
Award, the Junior Investigator Award, and the New
Investigator Award.
Sponsored by the ASPET Division for
Cardiovascular Pharmacology
The Benedict R. Lucchesi Young Scientist
Travel Award in Cardiac Pharmacology
was established to honor Dr. Lucchesi’s
lifelong scientific contributions to our better
understanding and appreciation of the
pharmacological treatment and prevention of cardiovascular
disease and for his mentoring of countless prominent
cardiovascular pharmacologists in translational approaches.
The applicant must be within 10 years of receiving their PhD.
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Have you mentored a young investigator whose original research is outstanding?
Nominate them for the Abel Award.
Did your mentor have a profound impact on you and the pharmacology community?
Nominate your mentor for the Axelrod Award.
Do you know someone who epitomizes high standards of ethical behavior, scientific scholarship, publication, and teaching?
Nominate them for the Krayer Award.
Are you an investigator looking for extended funding for research directed toward improving human health?
Nominate yourself for the Lehr Research Award.
Do you know a clinical pharmacologist who excels in research and/or teaching?
Nominate them for the Spector Award.
Is the head of your department or lab at the height of their career, having made significant contributions to an area of pharmacology?
Nominate them for the Ruffolo Award.
Do you have a colleague who has made a major impact on the pharmacological treatment of disease?
Nominate them for the Pharmacia-ASPET Award.
83
ASPET is grateful for all of our members who helped to fund the scientific
achievement awards. In particular, for our 2017 awards, we’d like to thank Mrs.
Lisa Lehr, Dr. Reynold and Mrs. Michiko Spector, Dr. Robert Ruffolo, and Dr.
Charles Rutledge.
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Taxol: Barking Up the Right Tree
One morning, Bob Holton
discovered that his Tallahassee
laboratory had been
vandalized. An Iowa football
coach had broken in, wanting a
drug for his dying mother (1, 2).
Reports of innovative synthetic
chemistry rarely interest the
general public, but Holton’s
recently published paper had
attracted considerable media
attention. Investigators claimed
that the drug suppressed
ovarian and breast cancer
better than anything else. And,
it was exceedingly hard to get.
Holton was attending a North Carolina high school in 1960 when
the National Cancer Institute (NCI) first started testing plant extracts for
their potential as anticancer drugs. The NCI had created the Cancer
Chemotherapy National Service Center five years earlier as a simple
service for assessing small synthetic compounds. The screening
program rapidly expanded, testing 30,000 small molecules annually,
and then added natural products (3, 4).
In June 1960, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) began
collecting a wide variety of plant specimens for the program (4).
Other NCI contractors then prepared plant extracts, conducted initial
screening, and isolated pure compounds from crude extracts that
exhibited activity. Over the next twenty years, NCI would evaluate
114,045 extracts from more than 15,000 plant species (2, 4).
Dr. Robert Holton
Re
pri
nte
d w
ith p
erm
issi
on
fro
m F
lori
da
Sta
te U
niv
ers
ity
Offi
ce o
f R
ese
arc
h. P
ho
to: R
ay
Sta
nya
rd.
Rebecca J. Anderson
84
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Mount St. Helens in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest in Washington.
Barclay’s BarkAmong those assigned to do the plant collections
was Arthur Barclay, a 30-year-old botanist who had
joined the USDA’s research branch after graduating
from Harvard (3). Barclay’s first assignment for the
NCI program was collecting sunflower and daisy
specimens in South Africa. In 1961, he was sent to the
southwestern US and Mexico (4).
On June 19, 1962, Barclay arrived in northern
California and continued collecting specimens
throughout northwest Nevada, Oregon, and
Washington. On August 21, he ventured to a spot
at the foot of Mt. St. Helens in the Gifford Pinchot
National Forest (2, 3). At an elevation of 1,500 feet,
Barclay and his three graduate student assistants
found a 25-foot Pacific yew tree, Taxus brevifolia (3).
They put twigs, needles, and fruit from the tree in a
burlap bag labeled PR-4959 and put bark samples in
another bag marked PR-4960—in all, about 15 pounds
of material (2, 4).
They then hiked seven miles to their base camp
in Packwood, Washington, and spread the material
on the floor of an abandoned house that served as
their impromptu staging area. After a few days, the
dried yew specimens (now less than a third of their
wet weight) were packed, labeled, and shipped to the
USDA’s research center in Beltsville, Maryland (2).
The USDA sent the yew specimens to the
Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, one of
the labs contracted by the NCI to prepare crude
plant extracts (3). To test for anticancer activity, the
NCI arranged to have the crude extracts screened
in bioassays at several other contract labs (e.g.,
Arthur D. Little, Hazleton Labs, and Microbiological
Associates). The assays included one in vitro assay
(KB cell culture) and a few in vivo assays of leukemia
in mice (4).
On May 22, 1964, Microbiological Associates in
Bethesda, MD, reported that the PR-4960 bark extract
was active in the KB assay (3, 4). The lab confirmed
the KB activity in June and July, but the in vivo results
were inconsistent (5).
The bark extract was active in L1210 leukemia
mice in one experiment but not in another. In other
leukemia and lymphoma models, the extract was
inactive. Nevertheless, the repeated cytotoxic effect
in the KB assay met the NCI’s criteria (5, 6). The next
step was determining the compound(s) in the extract
responsible for activity. The NCI had contracted
several academic chemistry laboratories to fractionate
active extracts and isolate pure compounds. But for
that, the chemists needed a larger sample of bark.
The USDA dispatched Barclay to the spot where
he had collected PR-4960. On September 8, 1964,
he bagged 30 pounds of bark from the Pacific yew
tree, recording the sample as PR-8059 (3, 4). It was
shipped to Monroe Wall at the Research Triangle
Institute in North Carolina.
The Fifth WallMonroe Wall began his career at the USDA in
1940. As a chemist, he was responsible for analyzing
plant extracts at the agency’s research branch in
Philadelphia (4). Ten years later, his priority shifted
to cortisone, a newly discovered “wonder drug” for
treating rheumatoid arthritis.
Cortisone was a steroid laboriously extracted from
animal adrenal glands, and supplies were limited (3).
Because of the great demand, President Harry Truman
directed government researchers to find better ways
of producing it.
85
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
86
The USDA’s Philadelphia branch mounted an
intensive effort to find plant steroids that could
serve as a starting material for making cortisone
synthetically. For nine years, Wall’s team sent
promising samples to the National Institutes of Health
for evaluation (3). Unfortunately, most of the plant
extracts lacked steroid precursors.
Wall sent about 1,000 of his plant extracts to the
NCI’s fledgling cancer screening program (3, 4). A
sample from Camptotheca acuminata, a large shade
tree that is native to China, showed impressive
activity (2, 3). However, because the USDA research
branch’s mandate was steroid chemistry for cortisone
production, extracts with anticancer properties were
not pursued (3).
Frustrated by the USDA’s lack of interest in C.
acuminata, Wall moved to the Research Triangle
Institute in July 1960. Founded just two years earlier,
this new research venture linked the university towns
of Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill, and for Wall,
the move to North Carolina was risky. He had built a
stellar 20-year reputation at the USDA and left behind
a state-of-the-art lab (2, 3).
Starting with “nothing but four walls,” the fifth
Wall created a robust chemistry program and a
thriving Natural Products Laboratory (3). He also re-
established his relationship with the NCI (2).
By this time, the NCI’s simple screening service had
evolved into a “massive machine,” capable of doing
everything for drug development from animal breeding
to clinical trials. The NCI also maintained banks of
frozen tumors and the world’s largest database of
experimental drugs (4).
Wall joined chemists at a handful of academic
laboratories that the NCI had contracted to isolate and
purify active compounds from crude plant extracts (2, 4).
Along with his colleague, Mansukh Wani, Wall resumed
his work on C. acuminata. They succeeded in isolating
camptothecin from a sample of wood and bark, and the
NCI subsequently initiated clinical trials (3).
From Trash to TreasureIn September 1964, Bob Holton was an
undergraduate at the University of North Carolina—just
14 miles from Wall’s laboratory—when Barclay’s PR-
8509 sample of Pacific yew bark arrived. It was one of
seven plant samples in that shipment—all “confirmed
actives” in the screening assays and all slated for
fractionation and isolation (2, 4).
Wall and Wani were preoccupied with
camptothecin, especially making supplies so that the
NCI could start clinical trials (3). No one knew much
about the Pacific yew, and the variable responses in
the mouse assays provided little incentive for Wall to
change his priorities (4).
About six months after the yew bark arrived, Wall
finally started the tedious process of fractionating the
crude extract. In a slow, iterative process, each extract
fraction was submitted for in vitro (KB) and in vivo
(L1210) assessment at Hazleton Laboratories, one of
the NCI’s contractors (3, 4).
By December 1965, Wall had exhausted
his supply of yew bark and asked the NCI to
arrange another collection. In May 1966, Wall
received 45 pounds of bark, 135 pounds of
twigs and needles, and 55 pounds of wood
from Pacific yews (4).
Wall continued refining the extracts. One
fraction was 1,000-fold more potent than
the crude extract and gave excellent results
in the mouse assays (4). On May 20, 1966,
an excited Wall told the NCI, “This is the
broadest spectrum of activity we have ever
noted in our samples” (2, 4). In what proved
to be a prophetic observation, Wall noted
that the purified yew fraction was active in
an assay that led to the discovery of the first
vinca alkaloids. None of Wall’s previous
Dr. Monroe Wall and Dr. Mansukh WaniR
ep
rin
ted
with
pe
rmis
sio
n f
rom
Flo
rid
a S
tate
Un
ive
rsity
Offi
ce o
f R
ese
arc
h. P
ho
to: R
ay
Sta
nya
rd.
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
87
plant specimens had shown activity in that particular
assay (2, 4).
In September 1966, Wall and Wani succeeded
in crystallizing the active compound, which they
designated K172 (3, 4). Unfortunately, yew bark
contained very little K172. From 12 kg of dried bark,
they could extract only 0.5 gram of pure K172, a yield
of just 0.004% (4).
In August 1966 and again in March 1967, Wall
requested more material. “We need a lot more…if we
are going to get enough product even for preliminary
chemistry and the necessary preliminary antitumor
studies” (4). The USDA arranged for another collection,
and 2,500 pounds of yew bark were shipped to Wall’s
lab in North Carolina (4).
K172 was a complicated molecule. But even before
Wall and Wani elucidated its chemical structure, they
knew it contained some hydroxyl groups, making it
an alcohol (3). With this in mind and also drawing on
the yew’s botanical name, Wall named the compound
“taxol” in June 1967. He thought taxol “had a nice ring
to it,” and the name stuck (3, 4).
Bob Holton had now moved to Florida State
University. His doctoral research centered on the
“secondary metabolites” produced by flowering plants
in the daffodil family (2). Secondary metabolites
do not support a plant’s vital functions or growth.
Rather, they play a defensive role, deterring insects
and other predators. Not surprisingly, many of these
complex molecules are poisonous, but they have
also been explored for medicinal utility. Those with
cytotoxic properties were ideal candidates for cancer
treatment. Holton, who was training as a synthetic
organic chemist, focused on isolating some of these
enormously complicated molecules and then finding a
way to make them in the lab (2).
Searching for TaxolNow that taxol had been identified as the
anticancer substance in yew extracts, the NCI wanted
to know the best source of it. They tested extracts
from Taxus baccata (English/European yew), T.
cuspidata (Japanese yew), T. floridana (Florida yew),
T. canadensis (Canadian yew), T. globosa (Mexican
yew), and T. chinensis (Chinese yew). Most specimens
contained taxol, but the yield was somewhat lower
than from Pacific yews (4).
They also tested samples of Pacific yews collected
throughout the Pacific Northwest, from California to
Alaska. The KB results varied and could not be easily
correlated with the location where the trees grew.
In a further study, many extracts of Pacific yew
bark, roots, wood, and needles showed at least some
activity. Needle extracts were sometimes more active
than bark but other times much less. Overall, the NCI
concluded that bark from the Pacific yew consistently
yielded the most taxol.
Climbing EverestWall’s main interest was elucidating the chemical
structure of taxol. After years of painstaking analysis,
he succeeded. The molecule consisted of a small side
chain attached to a large three-ring component called
a taxane (7).
Pacific yew tree, Taxus brevifolia
Re
pri
nte
d w
ith p
erm
issi
on
fro
m B
ug
wo
od
.org
. Ph
oto
: D
ave
Po
we
ll, U
SD
A F
ore
st S
erv
ice
(re
tire
d).
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
88
Wall and Wani published their paper in May
1971, and taxol’s chemical structure captured the
imagination of many academic researchers. At
Stanford University, Robert Holton was 27 years old
and just starting his postdoctoral training. When he
read the paper, all he could say was, “Wow” (2). Taxol
was the ultimate chemical synthesis challenge—but
much too complicated for postdoctoral research. For
Holton, taxol would have to wait (2).
Organic chemistry professors were also intrigued.
Laboratory synthesis of taxol would require ingenuity
and new approaches to chemical reactions. For them,
taxol was “a molecular Mount Everest” (4).
The National Institutes of Health provided some
grant money for taxol research. A few professors
explored structure-activity relationships, but most were
driven by the chemical synthesis challenge (1). None of
them viewed taxol as a viable commercial product (4).
Monroe Wall, on the other hand, thought the low
yield and complex structure should not pose barriers
to taxol development. In the early 1970s, he traveled
to Bethesda a dozen times to advocate for taxol (2).
But the NCI decision-makers saw only modest activity
in the mouse assays and had other compounds that
looked more promising.
As a further handicap, Wall could not devote the
time to extract all of the taxol needed for development.
In February 1974, he sent his remaining supply of
taxol (815 mg) to the Natural Products Branch of
the NCI (4).
The timing was fortuitous. The NCI had begun
shifting from its heavy reliance on leukemia animal
models. Slow-growing solid tumors caused
the majority of cancer deaths in the US, and
to represent them, the NCI added the Lewis
lung and B16 (melanoma) tumor models to their
screening program (4). Wall’s taxol sample
was tested in these tumor models in April 1974,
September 1974, and June 1975. The results
were mixed and kept taxol low on the priority
list (4, 5).
In October 1976, Matthew Suffness joined
the Plant and Animal Products Section
of the NCI’s Natural Products Branch. A
pharmaceutical chemist, Suffness was
well acquainted with plant chemistry and extract
screening. He reviewed the accumulated taxol
results—some of it dating back 12 years (2, 4). On the
strength of the consistent activity in the KB assay and
the more recent B16 tumor assay results, Suffness
realized that taxol met the NCI’s criteria for further
development—but just barely (5).
On April 18, 1977, the NCI finally decided to
move forward with taxol (4, 5). The next hurdle was
formulating it for clinical trials, and for that, they
needed more taxol. The NCI contracted Polysciences,
a small industrial chemical supplier in Warrington,
Pennsylvania, to purify taxol using Wall’s methods.
At the end of April 1977, Polysciences received
“two drums of tar” (4). The 26 kg lot of concentrated
extract came from bark collected in the Pacific
Northwest in 1967 and 1968, and it had been sitting in
storage. Polysciences successfully isolated 110 grams
of pure taxol and delivered it to NCI in March 1978 (4).
Most of it was used for formulation development.
Clinicians needed an intravenous liquid for their
patients. Unfortunately, taxol was virtually insoluble
(5, 8). After a year of failed attempts, the NCI team
found that taxol dissolved in a solution of 50%
Cremophor EL and 50% ethanol (5, 9). Cremophor
EL (a 35:1 mixture of ethylene oxide and castor oil)
had been used to formulate other drugs, such as
cyclosporine (2). But when given as a large bolus,
Cremophor EL could cause vasodilation, shortness of
breath, and hypotension (9).
Re
pri
nte
d w
ith p
erm
issi
on
fro
m P
NA
S. I
nsi
gh
ts in
to t
he
me
cha
nis
m o
f m
icro
tub
ule
st
ab
iliza
tion
by
taxo
l. “C
op
yrig
ht
(20
06
) Na
tion
al A
cad
em
y o
f S
cie
nce
s, U
.S.A
.”
This is the kind of chemical that only
a tree would make
Dr. Susan B. Horwitz
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
89
Horwitz Shakes Things UpIn parallel with the formulation studies, the NCI
researchers began studying taxol’s mechanism of
action. They also invited a few external scientists,
including Susan Horwitz, to join the effort (10).
Horwitz was a molecular pharmacologist at Albert
Einstein College of Medicine and had been studying
the cytotoxic mechanism of action of other natural
products, bleomycin in particular.
Although unfamiliar with taxol, she was
immediately fascinated. “This is the kind of chemical
that only a tree would make” (10). She decided
to devote a month to the project, and if nothing
interesting happened, she would move on. Horwitz
received a 10 mg sample in June 1977. And it was
interesting. In cultured HeLa cells, taxol potently
inhibited cell division (10). She requested another
sample in October (4).
Cell division—and other cell functions—require
a dynamic equilibrium between microtubules and
monomeric tubulins. Any compound that disrupts
this equilibrium is likely to be cytotoxic (1, 5, 9).
Several anticancer compounds, including colchicine
and the vinca alkaloids, inhibited cell division by
binding to tubulin and preventing formation of
microtubules. By the 1960s, colchicine had become
an indispensable tool to cell biologists, who used it to
study cell division.
To Horwitz’s surprise, taxol disrupted cell division
differently. Instead of inhibiting microtubule
formation like the other antimitotic compounds,
taxol shifted the equilibrium in favor of microtubule
formation and inhibited their disassembly (10). The
accumulated mishmash of microtubules prevented
cancer cells from coordinating cell division. The cells
soon collapsed and died (2, 3, 9).
Horwitz published her findings in 1979 (10). Cell
biologists worldwide immediately recognized
the value of taxol for studying cell dynamics.
Taxol’s novel mechanism of action complemented
depolymerizing agents like colchicine, and the NCI
was flooded with requests for samples of it (4).
The French ConnectionHorwitz’s paper also sparked the interest of Pierre
Potier in France. Potier had been investigating natural
products and synthetic compounds that acted like
colchicine (6). His group assessed those compounds
in a sensitive in vitro assay that measured interference
with the tubulin assembly-disassembly process (6).
Potier worked at a
facility near Paris, the
Centre National de la
Recherche Scientifique,
which was located on
a campus full of Taxus
baccata (European yew).
Coincidently, some of
those trees had been
felled to make way for
a new road across the
campus (6). Potier took advantage of this opportunity
to assess the needles, roots, bark, and wood of the
European yew for taxol-like activity.
The lab prepared extracts and tested each
fraction in the tubulin assay (6). The most abundant
active constituent in the needle extracts was
10-deacetylbaccatin III (10-DAB). Potier recognized
this molecule as the large taxane ring portion of taxol.
Interestingly, 10-DAB had not been active in the NCI’s
screening assays, but Potier’s tubulin assay was more
sensitive and detected mild inhibition of microtubule
disassembly (6).
Potier’s group published their findings in 1981.
Chemists immediately realized 10-DAB was an ideal
starting material for synthesizing taxol (3). Unlike bark,
yew needles were a renewable resource, and 10-DAB
was easy to obtain. A number of top-notch chemists
were awarded NCI grants to find a practical way of
adding the small side chain to the C13 site of 10-DAB,
which would produce taxol (2, 3).
In France, Potier also pursued taxol synthesis
through two collaborations. The first was with Andrew
Greene, who headed Centre National’s research
group in Grenoble. Greene’s group would synthesize
the taxol side chain. Potier’s group in Paris would
devise a synthetic route for attaching the side chain to
10-DAB (4).
Potier’s natural products group also signed
a collaborative agreement with Rhône-Poulenc
Rorer. Together, they would explore the chemistry
of taxane compounds, define the structure-activity
relationships, and seek new and patentable
anticancer compounds (4).
All of these chemists knew attaching the side
chain to 10-DAB was easier said than done. The
15-membered taxane ring system of 10-DAB had many
points where the side chain preferred to attach, rather
than the C13 site that would create taxol (9). Progress
was slow.
Dr. Pierre Potier
Re
pri
nte
d w
ith p
erm
issi
on
fro
m IC
SN
/CN
RS
.
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
90
Using YewsToxicology testing of taxol began in October 1980,
and to keep development on track, the NCI needed
more of it (4). Without a viable synthetic method, the
most expedient source remained natural extraction.
And the best extracts, based on the NCI’s assessment,
came from Pacific yew bark.
Taxus brevifolia is an evergreen with reddish-
purple bark and flat, inch-long needles (3). Yew trees
grow very slowly, reaching a height of about 30 feet
in 100 years. Yew wood is hard, heavy, and slow to
rot (3). The English yew provided wood for longbows
that were critical to the English victories at Crecy and
Agincourt, and Wordsworth extolled its virtues in his
poem, “Yew Trees” (5). But Pacific yew wood was not
of much commercial use except for fence posts (3, 4).
Pacific yews grow in the shade of giant conifers,
on the banks of streams, in deep gorges, and in damp
ravines, but they are widely scattered. According to
one Forest Service researcher, “If you walk over 100
acres of forest, you can expect to find yews on four of
them” (8).
Young yews are little more than shrubs—too small
to harvest any bark from (8). Adding to the difficulties,
bark could only be collected during the spring and
summer months when the sap was running (4). The
paper-thin bark was laboriously hand-peeled, either
from the standing trees or after they were felled.
Either way, stripping the bark killed the tree (1, 3).
In October 1981, collectors delivered 3,366 lbs of
bark to Polysciences. Over the next year, Polysciences
produced about 260 g of pure taxol to support the
toxicology studies (4, 5).
Shifting to the ClinicIn the late 1970s, the NCI expanded its repertoire
of solid tumor screening assays. Colonies of
immunosuppressed mice were implanted with human
tumors from the colon (CX-1), lung (LX-1), or breast
(MX-1)—animal models that represented the three
major types of cancer in the US. Taxol inhibited tumor
growth in the colon and lung assays. Even better,
taxol produced considerable regression of the breast
tumors (4).
Phase I clinical trials began in April 1984 at seven
clinical sites involving 101 patients (4, 5). Like virtually
every other stage of taxol’s development, things got off
to a rocky start. Drug injections caused hypersensitivity
reactions in about 10% of the patients. The problem
was attributed to the Cremophor-ethanol vehicle (5, 9).
Pretreatment with antihistamines and dexamethasone
and a slow, continuous 24-hour infusion minimized the
hypersensitivity responses (1, 5, 9).
Some of the patients with ovarian and renal cell
carcinoma responded to taxol treatment, and on April
16, 1985, the NCI decided to move forward with Phase
II trials (4, 5). Those trials required considerably more
taxol. Having ended its interagency agreement with
the USDA, the NCI made arrangements directly with an
Oregon fencepost dealer to collect 12,000 lbs of yew
bark. Concerns of wildfires delayed collection, but
11,000 lbs of bark were delivered in the fall of 1986 (4).
The Phase II trials were conducted at the same
seven centers that had participated in the Phase I
trials. The Johns Hopkins Oncology Center recruited
ovarian cancer patients, and the Albert Einstein
College of Medicine recruited renal cancer patients.
Encouraged by taxol’s response in the B16 (melanoma)
mouse assay, the remaining five centers (which were
part of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group –
ECOG) recruited melanoma patients (4).
Because taxol had shown impressive activity in
the MX-1 mammary tumor screen, the NCI wanted to
recruit breast cancer patients, too. But those trials
were delayed. Lack of taxol supplies had become
critical (1).
On December 1, 1986, the NCI’s Developmental
Chemotherapy Section met to address the crisis. So
far, three of the Phase II centers had enrolled patients.
Only one of the 14 melanoma patients at the ECOG
centers had responded to taxol. At Johns Hopkins, the
results were more encouraging. Two of the first seven
patients with refractory ovarian cancer had shown a
partial response, and one had a marginal response (4).
The NCI had sufficient taxol to supply the enrolled
patients, but there was not enough on hand to start
even one more Phase II trial. And, the next delivery
from Polysciences was not expected before spring.
At least seven planned Phase II trials were put on
hold. ECOG stopped enrollment in February 1987,
with 3 of 24 melanoma patients showing partial
responses (4). Johns Hopkins continued to enroll
ovarian cancer patients (1).
To ease the crisis, the NCI ordered 60,000 lbs of
bark, which would yield about 3 kg of taxol. Patrick
Connolly, a lumber contractor, collected 37,000 lbs
of bark in the 1987 harvest season and delivered the
remainder of the bark in August 1988 (4).
Extracting and purifying that much material
stretched the capacity at Polysciences to the limit.
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
91
The NCI contracted Hauser Chemical Research, a
natural products facility in Boulder, Colorado, to assist
(4). In February 1989, Hauser completed the crude
extraction from 25,000 lbs of Connolly’s collection.
Polysciences and Hauser then began isolating pure
taxol from the extract.
The 3 kg of taxol produced from Connolly’s bark
harvest was sufficient to resume the suspended Phase
II clinical trials. But to continue beyond that, NCI
realized that they needed even more taxol.
In April 1989, NCI awarded a contract for another
60,000 lbs of bark to John Destito at Advanced
Molecular Technologies in Bellevue, Washington.
Destito was a capable, creative, and collaborative
entrepreneur. But despite his best efforts, he
experienced frustrating delays.
To speed things up, Destito decided to stockpile
the yew logs through the winter and peel the bark
mechanically after steaming the cut logs at 40°C.
Destito’s ingenious method allowed harvesting out
of season, automated the debarking process, and
produced the same taxol yield as hand-peeling (4).
Going CommercialThe clinical results, especially from Johns Hopkins,
kept getting better. William McGuire, who led the
Johns Hopkins clinical trial, reported his results to the
American Society of Clinical Oncology in May 1988.
Noting a 30% response rate, he said, “There is no
other drug that has produced this kind of response in
drug refractory ovarian cancer…There were patients
treated who were two to three weeks from death who
are still alive today because of taxol” (4, 11).
At the NCI, one
official told a colleague
that public interest was
intense. “People are
begging for it” (4). But the
cost of converting Pacific
yew bark to taxol was
draining the NCI’s budget,
and many other promising
drug candidates were competing for the same funds
(2). The NCI wanted to develop taxol but needed help.
The solution was a CRADA. Congress had recently
instituted Cooperative Research and Development
Agreements under the Federal Technology Transfer
Act. CRADAs encouraged and facilitated the transfer
of commercially promising knowledge from federal
agencies to private industry.
On August 1, 1989, the Federal Register published
the NCI’s announcement for the taxol CRADA. To
qualify, a drug company needed to have experience
developing natural products and be willing to cover
the cost of collecting bark, as well as extracting,
purifying, and formulating taxol. The NCI would
turn over all of its taxol data to the company, and in
return, the company was expected to expedite taxol’s
development and regulatory approval (1).
Semi-synthesis SucceedsWorking independently and largely ignored by the
NCI, Pierre Potier and Andrew Greene had continued
their efforts to synthesize taxol. In 1988, after nearly
a decade of research, they published their “highly
efficient practical approach” for attaching 10-DAB to
the appropriate side chain (12). They also applied for a
French patent.
In the wake of the Potier-Greene paper, the NCI
greatly increased funding for taxol chemistry projects.
Purifying taxol from bark took more than a year, and
the NCI realized that demand was accelerating much
faster than yew trees grew. Soon, 30 chemistry
groups were working on the synthesis of taxol (1).
Robert Holton was now a chemistry professor at
Florida State University. Academic tenure afforded
him more freedom in selecting research projects. He
chose taxol. But despite the publicity surrounding
the clinical supply crisis and Potier-Greene’s semi-
synthetic achievement, Holton’s interests were purely
academic. He was driven by the intellectual challenge
of synthesizing taxol from scratch (2).
Holton had already succeeded in synthesizing
part of the taxane ring when Matthew Suffness
called him. Suffness, who had trained in the
same Stanford lab as Holton, was now Chief of
the Natural Products Branch at the NCI (2). He
assured Holton that taxol was not just a chemical
curiosity. Thousands of patients needed the drug,
and “somebody’s gotta figure out how to make it”
(2). Holton put aside his total synthesis project and
focused on practical solutions.
Within 18 months, Holton found a semi-synthetic
route that delivered twice the yield of Potier’s process
(2, 4). Holton patented his method in May 1991 and
began contacting drug companies that might be
interested in adapting it for commercial production of
taxol (1, 2). One of them was Bristol-Myers Squibb.
The cost of
converting Pacific
yew bark to taxol
was draining the
NCI’s budget
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
92
The Owl in the TreeConcerns were intensifying that taxol extraction
from Pacific yew bark was unsustainable. Since the
1940s, the logging industry had been given fairly
free rein to clear-cut old-growth forests and harvest
commercially valuable species such as Douglas fir,
Sitka pine, and western cedar. Loggers gathered the
remaining “trash trees,” shrubs, and plants into “slash
piles” and burned them (4). The cleared area was
then replanted with an even-age forest containing
only commercially valued trees.
Aggressive logging
had destroyed about
85% of the old-growth
forests in the Pacific
Northwest, including “trash
trees” like the Pacific
yew (4). To preserve a
portion of the old-growth
forests, environmentalists
succeeded in listing
the spotted owl as a
threatened species in June
1990. Unfortunately, the spotted owl was a poorly
chosen surrogate for the plants and animals in this
habitat. It wasn’t cuddly like baby seals, and the
poor spotted owl was caught in a highly politicized
battle between environmentalists and workers whose
livelihood depended on logging.
Everyone was now hugging the
scrawny tree
Because yews had been commercially unimportant,
no one had bothered to conduct a proper inventory,
and estimates varied widely. Regardless, sooner or later
the species would be extinct, and everyone was now
hugging the scrawny tree. It was the sole source of a
potent drug that could help thousands of cancer patients.
In an extraordinary move, both sides came together
to support the Pacific Yew Act. Pacific yew trees were
declared a public resource, and the Secretaries of
Agriculture and Interior were charged with managing
all yew trees on federal lands. Pacific yews could be
felled only to manufacture taxol (4).
Accelerating ApprovalAfter more than a year of negotiations, the NCI
and Bristol-Myers Squibb signed the taxol CRADA in
January 1991—the latest step in a long-standing and
special relationship (4). In 1972, Bristol-Myers had
been the first drug company to sign an agreement
to market drugs emerging from the NCI’s cancer
screening program. Furthermore, Bristol-Myers
Squibb was one of the few drug companies with broad
experience developing cancer drugs and handling
natural products (13).
Under the CRADA, Bristol-Myers Squibb took over
the NCI’s contracts for all Pacific yew collections of
bark, needles, and twigs (1, 9). In addition, the Pacific
Yew Act effectively reserved all Pacific yew trees on
federal lands for Bristol-Myers Squibb and only for
medicinal use until 1998 (4).
To satisfy the environmentalists, Bristol-Myers
Squibb paid for research on yew ecology, the
first official inventory of Pacific yew trees, and an
Environmental Impact Statement assessing the effect
of short-term, large-scale bark harvesting (13). Bristol-
Myers Squibb also contracted Weyerhaeuser, the
largest supplier of timber in the US, to cultivate Taxus
trees and conducted research to optimize their growth
and other properties (1, 13-15).
When John Destito’s NCI contract expired, Bristol-
Myers Squibb contracted Hauser Chemical Research
in Colorado as its supplier of both yew bark and pure
taxol (2, 13). Hauser collected 80,000 lbs of bark in
1990, 1.6 million lbs in 1991, and another 1.6 million lbs
in 1992 (1, 13, 16). Hauser’s process improvements
doubled the yield of taxol, producing about 230 kg
from 1990-1992 (4).
Bristol-Myers Squibb formulated taxol (30 mg/vial)
free of charge for the NCI’s clinical programs (1, 13).
In 1991, the company supplied about 3,750 vials per
month, enough to treat 500 patients (1, 14).
In 1992, the company increased supplies from
5,000 to 50,000 vials per month (13, 14). This
permitted the NCI to establish an ovarian cancer
treatment referral program, as well as a referral
protocol to treat breast cancer patients (13).
A mere 18 months after signing the CRADA, Bristol-
Myers Squibb submitted the accumulated taxol data
to the Food and Drug Administration. Taxol worked in
patients who had become resistant to platinum-based
therapy, which was the current “best drug” for ovarian
cancer, and it was effective in patients who had been
heavily pretreated with radiation and chemotherapy—
factors that usually reduced responses to subsequent
therapy (9, 11).
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
93
On December 29, 1992, FDA
approved taxol to treat refractory
ovarian cancer, making it the
first and only approved drug
to emerge from NCI’s plant
screening program (3, 17).
Taxol by Any Other NameTo further protect its
investment, Bristol-Myers Squibb
secured a trademark for its new
product. In a rather controversial
move, the US Patent and
Trademark Office granted the
company’s request to register
Taxol on May 26, 1992 (4).
At this point, taxol had been in widespread use as
a generic name for more than 20 years. Also, going
unnoticed was a laxative product that Continental
Laboratories had trademarked and sold as taxol in the
early 20th century (5).
Regardless, Bristol-Myers Squibb now had
exclusive rights to call its anticancer drug Taxol. Within
a couple of years, Taxol had been registered in more
than 50 countries (2). In 1993, the USAN authorized
“paclitaxel” as the new generic name of the molecule
that had formerly been called taxol.
Yew TurnWhile optimizing extraction procedures, Bristol-
Myers Squibb was working equally hard to reduce,
if not eliminate, its dependence on Pacific yew bark
(14). The long-term solution to the supply problem was
making taxol semi-synthetically, and the company was
receptive to Robert Holton’s offer (13).
On April 1, 1990, Bristol-Myers Squibb signed an
exclusive licensing agreement with Florida State
University to use Holton’s taxol patents, including an
improved method that gave an 80% overall yield in
just four steps (2). In exchange, Florida State would
receive royalties on the revenues derived from
Holton’s patents.
Bristol-Myers Squibb made speedy progress in
scaling up Taxol production at its plant in Ireland,
using Holton’s improved method and 10-DAB obtained
from Indena, a natural products company in Milan,
Italy (2, 8, 13, 16). Indena extracted large quantities of
10-DAB from renewable biomass (needles and twigs)
of European (Taxus baccata) and Himalayan (Taxus
wallichiana) yews (13, 15).
Bristol-Myers Squibb needed regulatory approval
to change Taxol manufacturing from bark extraction
to the new semi-synthetic process (13). The FDA
approved the change on October 14, 1994, making
further bark collections unnecessary (17).
The Bristol-Myers Squibb contract with Hauser
was not renewed, and with that, the Pacific yew
crisis ended. Environmentalists rejoiced and federal
conservation officials were relieved (15). The little yew
tree had gone from trash to treasure to trivial (2).
A Quantum LeapAbundant Taxol supplies hastened the pace of
clinical trials for other cancers. The first reports of
efficacy in refractory advanced breast cancer came
from the MD Anderson Cancer Center in October
1990 (1). The response rate of 56% was even better
than in ovarian cancer (18). A trial at Memorial Sloan-
Kettering in 1992 confirmed the results (19). Taxol was
effective even in patients who had become resistant to
anthracycline-based therapy, the current “best drug”
for breast cancer (9). The FDA approved Taxol for
refractory breast cancer in April 1994 and for non-small
cell lung cancer in June 1998 (17).
When Taxol made its debut in January 1993, it
was hailed as the most important anti-cancer drug in
15 years, but it was not perfect (2, 8). As with other
chemotherapy agents, bone marrow suppression and
white blood cell depletion were common. Taxol also
caused neuropathy, typically in the hands and feet,
and cardiac disturbances (9).
Nevertheless, Taxol
was the best thing
clinicians could offer at
the time (2). In 1995,
it was the best-selling
cancer drug in the world
with more than $500 million in sales. In 2000, sales
reached nearly $1.6 billion (2).
Totally SynthesizedChemists were still lured to the challenge of
synthesizing Taxol from scratch . As Robert Holton
explained to a reporter, “The ring systems are
unexplored ground. The stereochemistry, the variety of
substituents, the conformational peculiarities, the strange
reactivity…it’s an incredible challenge” (1). More than 100
academic groups worldwide were working on it (1, 2).
Re
pri
nte
d w
ith p
erm
issi
on
fro
m F
lori
da
Sta
te U
niv
ers
ity O
ffice
of
Re
sea
rch
. Ph
oto
: Ra
y S
tan
yard
.
The little yew tree
had gone from trash
to treasure to trivial
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
94
Then, in a virtual photo finish, two groups
succeeded (2, 4). On February 17, 1994, Kyriacos
Nicolaou and his team at the Scripps Research
Institute reported their success (20). Within a week,
Holton’s group at Florida State University published
their work (21).
Total synthesis of Taxol was a major intellectual
achievement, but it was of little practical importance.
Nicolaou’s method involved 28 steps (9). Holton’s
synthesis required 40 steps, and the yield was an
abysmal 2% (2, 4).
Enter TaxotereWhile Taxol made headlines in the US, Potier,
Greene, and their colleagues in France continued
to improve their own semi-synthetic method. In
collaboration with Rhône-Poulenc Rorer, they also
studied the structure-activity relationships of about 40
intermediates and analogs (1).
Among those compounds was RP56976, which was
slightly more active than Taxol in the tubulin assay.
RP56976 also exhibited significant antitumor activity
(6). Most impressively, it was 25% more soluble and
had better bioavailability than Taxol (1, 6, 9). RP56976
was named Taxotere (generic name, docetaxel).
In 1990, Rhône-Poulenc Rorer began Phase I clinical
trials in Europe and the US under a research and
development agreement with the NCI (1, 9). Referring
to their own semi-synthetic method, Potier boasted,
“Our group has solved the problem of industrial
production…We are today producing very large
amounts of Taxotere” (1).
The FDA approved Taxotere for advanced breast
cancer treatment in 1995 (4). It was subsequently
approved alone or in combination with other agents
for non-small cell lung cancer, prostate cancer, and
head and neck cancer (1, 14, 17).
University RoyaltyTraditionally, American universities aggressively
insulated their research from all commercial
influences. But the tech-transfer deal between Florida
State University and Bristol-Myers Squib caught the
attention of many university administrators (2). In 1996,
Florida State received more than $28 million in Taxol
royalties, and by the end of the decade, the royalties
topped $200 million. It was one of the largest patent
pay-outs for a single university in history (2).
Florida State used the royalties to underwrite a
dozen endowed professorships. Also, under its policy,
the university awarded faculty inventors 40% of the
royalties arising from their patents, making Holton a
very wealthy man (2).
The royalties fundamentally changed Holton’s
perspective. His achievements were widely
publicized, and hundreds of cancer patients and their
loved ones contacted him. He shifted his academic
chemistry pursuits and invested his royalties in applied
research. He wanted to find a better Taxol analog. “If
you have the opportunity to do something that could
save someone’s life, you just have to do it” (2).
References1. Borman S (September 2, 1991) Scientists mobilize to increase
supply of anticancer drug taxol. Chem Eng News 69(35): 11-18.
2. Stephenson F (Fall 2002) A tale of taxol. Research in Review,Florida State University; available from: http://www.rinr.fsu.edu/fall2002/taxol.html.
3. Ginsberg J (April 23, 2003) A National Historic ChemicalLandmark: The Discovery of Camptothecin and Taxol®. Sciencethat Matters, American Chemical Society; available from: http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/education/whatischemistry/landmarks/camptothecintaxol.html.
Chemical structures of paclitaxel (Taxol™), docetaxel (Taxotere™)
and 10-deacetylbaccatin III (precursor).
Re
pri
nte
d w
ith p
erm
issi
on
fro
m V
irg
inia
Te
ch. P
ho
to: D
avi
d G
.I. K
ing
sto
n.
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
95
4. Goodman J and Walsh V (2001) The Story of taxol: Nature and Politics in the Pursuit of an Anti-Cancer Drug, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
5. Kingston DGI (2007) The shape of things to come: structural and synthetic studies of taxol and related compounds. Phytochem 68(14): 1844-1854.
6. Guénard D, Guéritte-Voegelein F, and Potier P (1993) Taxol and Taxotere: discovery, chemistry, and structure-activity relationships. Acc Chem Res 26: 160-167.
7. Wani MC, Taylor HL, Wall ME, Coggon P, and McPhail AT (1971) Plant antitumor agents. VI. Isolation and structure of taxol, a novel antileukemic and antitumor agent from Taxus brevifolia. J Am Chem Soc 93(9): 2325-2327.
8. Kolata G (May 13, 1991) Tree yields a cancer treatment, but ecological cost may be high. New York Times; available from: http://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/13/us/tree-yields-a-cancer-treatment-but-ecological-cost-may-be-high.html.
9. Joel SP (March 7, 1994) Taxol and Taxotere: from yew tree to tumor cell. Chemistry & Industry, pp. 172-175.
10. Schiff PB, Fant J, and Horwitz SB (1979) Promotion of microtubule assembly in vitro by taxol. Nature 227: 665-667.
11. McGuire WP, Rowinsky EK, Rosenshein NB, Grumbine FC, Ettinger DS, Armstrong DK, and Donehower RC (1989) Taxol: A unique antineoplastic agent with significant activity in advanced ovarian epithelial neoplasms. Ann Intern Med 111: 273-279.
12. Denis JN, Greene AE, Guenard D, Gueritte-Voegelein F, Mangatal L, and Potier P (1988) Highly efficient, practical approach to natural taxol. J Am Chem Soc 110(17): 5917-5919.
13. DeFuria MD and Horovitz Z (1993) Taxol commercial supply strategy. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 15: 195-198.
14. Pink Sheet (March 9, 1992) Bristol-Myers Squibb plans taxol NDA filing by “mid-1992”: 1993 approval possible: supply to NCI will cover all 12,500 refractory cancer patients; available from: https://www.pharmamedtechbi.com/publications/the-pink-sheet/54/010/bristolmyers-squibb-plans-taxol-nda-filing-by-mid1992-1993-approval-possible-supply-to-nci-will.
15. Barnard J (March 13, 1994) Old-growth yew spared as cancer drug source: health: drug firm decides it can’t risk millions producing medication that comes only from slow-growing wild trees. Los Angeles Times; available from: http://articles.latimes.com/1994-03-13/local/me-33404_1_national-cancer-institute.
16. New York Times (January 30, 1993) New source of cancer drug spares yew tree; available from: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/31/us/new-source-of-cancer-drug-spares-yew-tree.html.
17. New York Times (December 12, 1994) New version of taxol is approved by FDA; available from: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/12/13/science/new-version-of-taxol-is-approved-by-fda.html.
18. Holmes FA, Walters RS, Theriault RL, Forman AD, Newton LK, Raber MN, Buzdar AU, Frye DK, and Hortobagyi GN (1991) Phase II trial of taxol, an active drug in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 83(24): 1797-1805.
19. Reichman BS, Seidman AD, Crown JPA, Heelan R, Hakes TB, Lebwohl DE, Gilewski TA, Surbone A, Currie V, Hudis CA et al. (1993) Paclitaxel and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as initial chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 11(10): 1943-1951.
20. Nicolaou KC, Yang Z, Liu JJ, Ueno H, Nantermet PG, Guy RK, Claiborne CF, Renaud J, Couladouros EA, Paulvannan K et al. (1994) Total synthesis of taxol. Nature 367: 630-634.
21. Holton RA, Kim HB, Somoza C, Liang F, Biediger RJ, Boatman PD, Shindo M, Smith CC, and Kim S (1994) First total synthesis of taxol. 2. Completion of the C and D rings. J Am Chem Soc 116(4): 1599-1600.
ASPET recognizes that Taxol is a registered trademark of Bristol-Myers Squibb and that Taxotere is a registered trademark of Sanofi.
Biosketch:
Rebecca J. Anderson holds
a bachelor’s in chemistry
from Coe College and
earned her doctorate
in pharmacology from
Georgetown University. She
has 25 years of experience
in pharmaceutical research
and development and now
works as a technical writer.
Her most recent book is
Nevirapine and the Quest
to End Pediatric AIDS. Email
In the next issue of The Pharmacologist…
Dr. Anderson will share the
story of chlorpromazine
and the dawn of
psychopharmacology.
Don’t miss the September
2016 issue.
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
9696
The individual partnering meetings were held the day before the scientific program of the Drug Discovery Colloquium.
Meeting NewsSubmitted by Michael Wood, PhD
Even by casual observation, it seems clear
that the licensing of drug candidates is becoming
more important to the pharmaceutical industry. In
fact, analysts estimate that the proportion of major
pharma pipeline candidates originating from outside
currently exceeds 50% and predictions suggest
that this share will continue to increase. Amid this
ongoing industry transformation, a traditional partner
is building prominence in a nontraditional capacity.
The role for academia in drug discovery is expanding.
In recognition of this trend, the Academic Drug
Discovery Consortium (ADDC) was established in
2012. ASPET connected with the ADDC to co-organize
and convene a colloquium on the topic of academic
drug discovery directly following the ASPET Annual
Meeting at Experimental Biology 2016 in San Diego.
The program was funded by fifteen commercial
sponsors, underscoring the interest of both pharma/
biotech and contract research organizations in
academic drug discovery.
The colloquium kicked off on the afternoon of April
6 with a partnering event in which leaders of academic
discovery centers met with both pharmaceutical
search and evaluation experts and representatives
from contract research service providers resulting
in over 200 interactions. One attendee, Dr. Richard
Neubig, professor and chair of the Department of
Pharmacology and Toxicology at Michigan State
University, commented that “the partnering meetings
provided a good mix of potential collaboration/licensing
partners and vendors with useful resources for drug
discovery applications.” The contacts made during
the partnering session expanded the
networks of the participants and will
undoubtedly catalyze future discussions
on collaboration. Given the complexity
and the scope of drug discovery,
partnership is essential to success and
the rapid-fire partnering session of the
colloquium was an efficient means to
quickly expand networks.
The scientific program of the
colloquium launched the following
morning with a series of presentations
focused on academic drug discovery
success stories. The audience heard
from established academic discovery
centers and newcomers as well.
Speakers highlighted academic
ASPET and ADDC Meet to Review Progress in Academic Drug Discovery
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
97
The Drug Discovery Colloquium was titled “Drug Discovery in America: Recent Successes and Emerging Opportunities.”
The partnering meetings provided
a good mix of potential collaboration/
licensing partners and vendors with
useful resources for drug discovery
applications
studies that sparked key insights into
biomedical challenges. They explained how
those insights matured into programs that
then moved through stages of the drug
discovery value chain, and how some had
been licensed by commercial enterprises
that were either start-ups or established
biotech/pharm companies. Dr. John Lazo,
professor of pharmacology at the University
of Virginia, pointed out that “drug discovery
is really at the foundation of ASPET” and
described the success stories as templates
for “how academics can participate in what is
considered commercial territory.” Three of the
eight program presentations were selected
from ASPET member submissions: Dr. Rangan
Maitra of RTI International – Discovery and
Characterization of Apelin Receptor Ligands
as Therapeutics for Metabolic Syndrome,
Dr. Joseph M. Salvino of Drexel University College
of Medicine – Cx3cr1 Chemokine Antagonists Halt
Metastatic Spreading In Animal Models of Metastasis,
and Dr. Matthew Duvernay of Vanderbilt University
– Towards an Efficacious, in vivo Protease Activated
Receptor 4 Antagonist. The collection of success
stories was diverse in both approach and content.
However, there were several unifying themes.
Common threads among
the presentations were
the use of team-based
approaches, examples
of creative solutions to
obstacles and what Dr.
Lazo labeled as “examples
of how failure can lead
to success.” The role
of academic drug discovery is expanding and this
segment of the colloquium provided a means to pause
and review the recent collective experience.
The next stage of the colloquium focused on
assessing some of the resources available to
academics with an interest in drug discovery. Dr.
Mike Poole, director of the Global Health Office of
the President at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,
began by revealing how the foundation prioritizes
investments to improve global health. His presentation
served as a reminder that non-governmental
organizations can stimulate research into treatments
for underserved populations. Reviews of the Structural
Genomics Consortium and the Tau Consortium were
followed by introductions to the National Cancer
Institute Experimental Therapeutics (NExt) and the
National Institutes of Health (NIH) Blueprint programs.
It is worth noting that both programs were specifically
designed to foster academic
drug discovery. A panel
discussion on partnering
drug discovery programs
concluded the speaking
portion of the colloquium,
and a combined poster/
buffet rounded out a full day
of programming. Despite
the ambitious meeting agenda, attendees entered
the poster session with indomitable enthusiasm
and continued a dialogue on the future trajectory of
academic drug discovery. There can be little question
that the excitement reverberating throughout the
academic drug discovery colloquium will continue to
echo. It also seems likely that the theme should be
revisited again in the near future.
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
98
The beautiful port city of Yokohama, Japan
provided the setting for the 89th Annual Meeting
of the Japanese Pharmacological Society (JPS),
held March 9 - 11, 2016. The Pacifico Yokohama
Conference Center, located in the modern Minato
Mirai district, served as the meeting venue.
Established in the mid-1800s, the relatively young
city of Yokohama has become the second largest city
in the ancient country of Japan, combining stunning
modern architecture with breathtaking ocean views.
The skyscrapers and elevated moving sidewalks
of this futuristic city by the sea were an appropriate
backdrop as over 2,000 scientists gathered to
hear presentations and participate in discussions
regarding the latest research in a broad range of
areas of modern pharmacology and biomedical
research. The meeting’s theme, “Voyage Beyond
the Horizon,” was chosen, in the words of meeting
president and organizer, Dr. Kunio Ishii, “in order to
show that our only path to opening up a bright future
for pharmacology lies in taking on bold challenges in
unknown fields.” This is a highly appropriate theme at
a time when there is a renewed focus in biomedical
sciences on translational research and integrating our
understanding from an atomic and molecular level to
highly complex systems and ultimately human health
and disease. As an inherently integrative discipline
that spans molecular, cellular, and systems research,
pharmacology plays a central role in bridging
discoveries across these multiple levels.
Indeed, the evolution of pharmacology as a
discipline combined with an increase in collaboration
among scientists around the world has created
more potential for positive impact than at any time
in history. Dr. Ishii’s vision for the JPS meeting
correlates perfectly with ASPET’s current emphasis
on partnering with other pharmacological societies to
facilitate the sharing of information and to encourage
collaborative efforts that will lead to new discoveries
and advances in treatment for citizens in every
country and at every level of society. Consistent
with this effort, ASPET has partnered with the
British Pharmacological Society (BPS), the Chinese
ASPET-JPS Lecture at the 89th Annual Meeting of the Japanese Pharmacological Society
Submitted by P. Jeffrey Conn, PhD
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
99
Pharmacological Society (CNPHARS), and the JPS.
Components of the partnerships include invited
lectures, sponsored symposia, and opportunities for
cultural and scientific exchange.
It was my honor to present the ASPET-JPS lecture
at the 89th Annual Meeting of the JPS. Speaking on
the topic “Allosteric modulators of GPCRs as a novel
approach to treatment of CNS disorders,” I shared a
vision for appropriate and critical roles of academic
drug discovery efforts in helping to bring about the
next generation of medicines for human diseases that
are not effectively treated with current therapeutic
agents. As an example, I focused on breakthroughs
in discovery and optimization of novel, highly
selective positive allosteric modulators of individual
subtypes of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors and
advancing these novel compounds into development
for treatment of devastating brain disorders. These
successes highlight the need for intense efforts
in every major area included in the overarching
discipline of pharmacology, including medicinal
chemistry, molecular modeling, cellular and systems
physiology, drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics,
behavioral pharmacology, and advanced in vivo
imaging of drug action in identified brain circuits.
There could be no more fitting place for
presentation of these new advances than at the
JPS meeting. The studies outlined in this talk
trace their roots back to the discovery and use of
acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors for treatment of
Alzheimer’s disease. Donepezil (brand name Aricept),
the gold-standard acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, was
discovered and developed by Dr. Hachiro Sugimoto
and his coworkers in the Japanese laboratories
of Eisai Co Ltd., and represents just one of many
examples of the strong tradition of pharmacology and
drug discovery in Japan.
The ASPET-JPS lecture was only one of many
talks and sessions at the JPS meeting highlighting
the excellence in pharmacology in Japan and the
importance of international collaboration in advancing
our discipline. There was no greater example than
the work of Dr. Satoshi Ōmura, who gave the plenary
lecture. Dr. Ōmura shared the 2015 Nobel Prize in
Physiology and Medicine with Dr. William C. Campbell
(USA) for their collaboration leading to the discovery
of avermectins/ivermectin through a collaborative
research program with Merck & Co., Inc. Ivermectin
is a ground breaking antiparasitic medicine that has
had a tremendous impact in providing an effective
treatment for river blindness and elephantiasis. Read
more about Ivermectin in ASPET’s March 2016 issue
of The Pharmacologist: http://bit.ly/1piu9fm
Continuing with Japan’s rich history in
pharmacology, Kyoto, Japan, will be the setting for
the IUPHAR 18th World Congress of Basic and Clinical
Pharmacology, July 1-6, 2018. This meeting will be
hosted by the JPS and the Japanese Society of
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics and is
being organized under the leadership of Dr.
Masamitsu Iino, who serves as president of the JPS.
Details of the upcoming IUPHAR Congress can be
found at www.wcp2018.org/.
The Minato Mirai district in Yokohama with views of the congress venue.
100
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Pharmacology 2016 with Guest Societies: ASPET, ASCPT, CNPHARS
ASPET is pleased to be a guest society at the British
Pharmacological Society’s (BPS) annual meeting,
Pharmacology 2016, taking place December 13 – 15, 2016.
This will be an international event with two other guest
societies, the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology
and Therapeutics and the Chinese Pharmacological Society.
We will be holding a joint symposium with the BPS
entitled, The Long Reach of the Bowel: Translating
Microbiome Science into Therapeutics for Systemic Human
Diseases, chaired by ASPET members Pamela J. Hornby,
PhD from Janssen and Ross Corriden, PhD from the
University of California, San Diego.
Abstract submission and registration will be opening in
June 2016. Please check the BPS website for more details:
http://bit.ly/1ryonqB.
The ASPET council has approved the funding of a BIG IDEAS II Initiative
proposal entitled Surmounting the Insurmountable – Obstacles in Drug
Discovery and Development: Real-World Case Studies submitted by
Drs. Kan He, Paul F. Hollenberg, Michael Holinstat, A. David Rodrigues,
Hequn Yin, W. Griffiths Humphreys, Thomas F. Woolf, Emily E. Scott, Wen
Chyi Shyu, and Darrell R. Abernethy. The leaders of this BIG IDEAS project
will organize a session at the ASPET Annual Meeting at EB2017 to provide
a forum for pharmacological experts to discuss “real world” stories recounting when, in their own experience,
insurmountable problems arose and explain how critical thinking and problem-solving skills were used for the
drug development process to continue.
Stay tuned for more information about this exciting new BIG IDEAS project!
ASPET will be offering travel awards on a
competitive basis to members interested in attending
Pharmacology 2016. Undergraduate students,
graduate students, and postdoctoral scientists are
encouraged to apply. Visit https://www.aspet.org/
ASPET_Travel_Awards/ for more information.
Council Approves Proposal from the BIG IDEAS II Initiative
101
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Science Policy
Federal Funding Levels for Science Agencies Uncertain Despite Bipartisan Support
The passage of the omnibus
spending bill last December yielded
positive results for major science
agencies, who received much-
needed increases to help in mitigating
the continued effects of 2013’s
sequestration.
The Bipartisan Budget Act of
2015 lifted the spending caps by $80
billion, or 3.9%, over two years, so the
appropriations committees are able
to move forward regardless of a full
congressional budget resolution. In
fiscal year (FY) 2016, the discretionary
spending cap increased by 5.2%,
which brought a $2 billion boost for the
National Institutes of Health (NIH). For
the current year, there is an almost 6%
increase for research and development
(R&D). Appropriators on both sides of the
aisle have voiced support for biomedical
research and backed it up with votes
102
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
and legislation, but the funding constraints in the
agreement make FY 2017 allocations less certain. The
caps will remain fundamentally flat for FY 2017, which
will make spending levels for the year only slightly
above sequestration levels; a situation not unlike the
circumstances of two years ago, again following a
two-year budget agreement. Also similar is the added
factor of an election year, leading many legislators to
resist controversial votes across party lines and spend
more time campaigning in their districts.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration’s science
budget request for FY 2017, which includes
discretionary spending and previously-approved
mandatory spending, would increase overall R&D
to $148.8 billion, an increase of 1.4% above FY 2016
levels. That is less than the rate of inflation. But with
the additional R&D requested through mandatory
spending, the total would reach $152.9 billion, a
4.2% increase.
It is likely that the President proposed mandatory
spending to circumvent the discretionary spending
caps. Many argue, however, that the challenges
of mandatory spending ultimately outweigh the
benefits. For example, new mandatory spending is
subject to pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) rules, meaning
it must be deficit-neutral and offset by revenue
increases or spending cuts elsewhere. Appropriators
are historically weary of mandatory spending, as it
essentially removes their oversight of how dollars
are allocated. The President’s proposal did succeed
in resurrecting the conversation on mandatory vs.
discretionary funding, and many have suggested it will
be considered again in future cycles.
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) initially stated
that he hoped to have all appropriations bills
passed through the House in July. The current
outlook, however, with continued conflict among the
congressional majority, the threat of policy riders, and
elections, suggests that we may be in for another
fourth quarter of heated negotiations and continuing
resolutions.
ASPET Submits Testimony to Congress on the Importance of NIH Funding in the FY 2017 Appropriations Cycle
The House and Senate appropriations committees
solicited testimony on funding priorities from
stakeholder organizations as they began their work
on the fiscal year (FY) 2017 budget for the federal
science agencies. ASPET responded with statements
to the appropriations subcommittees on Labor, Health
and Human Services, and Related Agencies (LHHS) in
both the House and the Senate.
The testimony outlines the importance of
sustained funding and appreciates the $2 billion
increase for NIH in FY 2016; urging Congress to
continue their support for biomedical research with a
recommendation of $35 billion for NIH in FY 2017.
103
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
9650 Rockville Pike | Bethesda | MD | 20814-3995P: (301) 634-7060 | F: (301) 634-7061 | E: [email protected] | www.aspet.org
Testimony of Kenneth E. Thummel on behalf of
The American Society for Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET) Submitted for the record to the Senate Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Senator Roy Blunt, Chairman; Senator Patty Murray, Ranking Member
Regarding
Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 Appropriations for the National Institutes of Health
• Steady and sustained investment in NIH is critical to improving human health, stimulating state and local economies, and maintaining the nation’s global competitiveness.
• The short-term implications of decreased funding for NIH is that only 1 out of 6 grant applications are funded, the lowest rate in the agency’s history, leaving unfunded many highly innovative ideas that have important implications for human health.
• The long-term implications of a lack of sustained federal investment in biomedical research are more dire: the U.S. share of global research and development will decline, as a consequence of increasing research-related spending by China, Russia, and the European Union. In addition, an increasing number of scientists who trained in and/or working in the U.S. will leave to pursue careers in other countries, further compromising our competiveness and leadership in the health sector of the global economy.
• Lawmakers must secure a bipartisan, balanced approach to deficit reduction so that vital investments in biomedical research can be sustained in the best interests of the nation.
• We call upon Congress to ensure that NIH remains a national priority, by awarding an FY2017 minimum budget of $35 billion to restore purchasing power lost over the last decade and to increase the pool of talented young scientists who pursue a career in biomedical research that will advance the health of the American people.
The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET) respectfully submits the following testimony regarding Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 federal appropriations for biomedical research. ASPET is a 5,100-member professional society, whose members conduct basic, translational, and clinical pharmacological research within the academic, industrial and government sectors and are educators of research, medical, dental, pharmacy and other health professionals. Our members discover and develop new therapeutic agents that fight existing and emerging diseases, and disseminate that knowledge to improve human health. Sustainable, consistent funding for research is critical to the development of new disease prevention and treatment modalities. To this end, ASPET recommends a minimum of $35 billion for NIH in FY 2017. Overview ASPET recognizes and very much appreciates the investment in research made by Congress with the $2 billion increase in funding for NIH included in the FY2016 omnibus appropriations bills. However, sustained commitment from Congress in FY 2017 is essential to mitigate losses from budget sequestration initiated in FY 2013. From 2003-2013, NIH budget failed to keep pace with inflation in research costs leading to a nearly 25% reduction in the agency’s purchasing power and 34% reduction in the primary grant mechanism that supports investigator-initiated research. Budget sequestration since 2013 has effectively codified the loss. A FY 2017 budget of $35 billion would help restore the agency’s lost purchasing power that has occurred over the past decade and enable the NIH to fund 465 more research grants.
Council
Kenneth E. ThummelPresidentUniversity of Washington
David R. SibleyPresident-ElectBethesda, Maryland
Annette E. FleckensteinPast PresidentUniversity of Utah
Dennis C. MarshallSecretary/TreasurerFerring Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Charles P. FranceSecretary/Treasurer-ElectUniversity of Texas Health ScienceCenter –- San Antonio
Paul A. InselPast Secretary/TreasurerUniversity of California – San Diego
John D. SchuetzCouncilorSt. Jude Children’s Research Hospital
Margaret E. GnegyCouncilorUniversity of Michigan Medical School
Wayne L. BackesCouncilorLouisiana State University Medical Center
Mary E. VoreChair, Board of Publications TrusteesUniversity of Kentucky
Brian M. CoxFASEB Board RepresentativeUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Scott A. WaldmanChair, Program CommitteeThomas Jefferson University
Judith A. SiuciakExecutive Officer
104
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
9650 Rockville Pike | Bethesda | MD | 20814-3995P: (301) 634-7060 | F: (301) 634-7061 | E: [email protected] | www.aspet.org
Diminished Support for NIH Will Negatively Impact Human Health Industry, venture capital, and private philanthropy can supplement some elements of health research but they cannot replace the investment in basic, translational and clinical biomedical research provided by NIH. Much of the research undertaken by industry builds upon the discoveries generated from NIH-funded projects. The majority of NIH’s investment in basic biomedical research is broad with a long-term commitment, thereby providing an ongoing source of discoveries that are utilized by commercial entities to manufacture and market diagnostics, drugs and devices. Many such entities have shrunk their research and development programs and thus, are making smaller commitments to invest in research that may be of higher risk and require several years to fully mature. High-risk but high impact efforts, especially in basic research, represent the essential role played by NIH and its funded investigators. Past investment in NIH-funded basic research has led to many innovative medicines. In addition, NIH-funded research has provided major gains in our knowledge of the human genome, resulting in enhanced drug efficacy and a reduction in adverse drug reactions that currently limit the effectiveness of potential life-saving medications. NIH is the world leader in efforts to prevent and treat HIV-AIDS; recent genetic studies have pinpointed disease-causing variants that have led to improved cure rates, but further advances and improvements in technology will be delayed with diminished NIH funding. The evolution of patient care into what has been termed “personalized” or “precision medicine” and its application to a wide range of clinical disorders, including cancer, necessitates research to identify and test optimal diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for individuals. Past investigator support from NIH has revealed new frontiers of immunopharmacology and regenerative medicine, which are saving millions of dollars by reducing in-patient hospital care for debilitative autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis, and restoring movement and function through regenerative interventions. Moreover, NIH is the only health organization capable of mounting an effective response to understand the mechanisms and develop treatments for rapidly emerging infectious diseases such as the Zika virus. Enhanced and sustained funding of NIH is essential for continued improvements in the prevention and treatment of these and many other diseases. Investing in NIH Helps America Compete Economically NIH research funding catalyzes private sector growth. More than 83% of NIH funding is awarded to over 3,000 universities, medical schools, teaching hospitals and other research institutions in every state in our nation. One national study found that combined federal and state funded research at the nation’s medical schools and hospitals supports almost 300,000 jobs and adds nearly $45 billion to the U.S. economy. NIH funding also provides the foundation for major scientific innovations in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, with new drug targets being discovered through NIH-supported basic research that can then be translated into novel drug treatments. Thus, an investment in NIH will help create jobs and promote economic growth. By contrast, a stagnating NIH budget will mean forfeiture of future discoveries and jobs to other countries, which are eager to “pick up this slack”. If funding for the next ten years is similar to that of the past decade, the nation will lose a generation of young scientists. Increasingly, these individuals, seeing no prospects for careers in biomedical research, will leave the research enterprise or look for employment in foreign countries. The “brain drain” of young scientific talent seriously jeopardizes the nation’s leadership in biomedical research and compromises future advances in the prevention and treatment of disease. A 2013 survey of ASPET’s membership revealed that 45% of post-doctoral trainees and 25% of graduate students say they are no longer considering a career in biomedical research due to the restrictive funding environment; 50% of graduate students and 29% of post-doctoral trainees say they are willing to consider leaving the U.S. in order to pursue a career in biomedical research. It is a sobering fact that the U.S. share of global research and development investment has declined substantially over that last two decades. In contrast, other nations are investing aggressively in science. For example, China has grown its science portfolio with annual increases to the research and development budget averaging over 20% annually since 2000. Russia plans to increase support for research substantially over the next decade. The European Union, despite great economic distress among its member nations, has proposed to increase spending on research and innovation by 45% between 2014 and 2020. All of these nations recognize the long-term economic value of scientific research and they are prioritizing their budgets accordingly. Conclusion ASPET acknowledges the many competing and important spending decisions that are made by the Subcommittee. However, NIH’s contribution to the nation’s economic well-being and to the health of its citizens should make it one of the nation’s top funding priorities. Ensuring a long-term commitment to discovering cures for disease is one major way in which we can work together as a Nation to reduce Medicare Medicaid expenditures without cutting benefits. Moreover, investment in research today has the potential, through new discoveries, to improve the quality, while lowering the cost of, health care, especially through efforts on the major causes of death of Americans. Lawmakers must replace sequestration in 2016 and beyond with a bipartisan, balanced approach to deficit reduction so that vital investments can be made that are in the best long-term interest of the nation. With enhanced and sustained funding, NIH can begin to reverse the decline in its operational footprint and help achieve its potential to address the most promising scientific opportunities and critical healthcare needs of our country. A budget of at least $35 billion in FY 2017 will build on the progress of the FY2016 funding, expand opportunities for investigation and increase the likelihood of new discoveries that prevent, diagnose, and treat disease.
105
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
ASPET Washington Fellows Visit Congress
For the fourth consecutive year,
ASPET’s Washington Fellows traveled to
Washington, DC for meetings with their
congressional delegations to discuss the
importance of funding for biomedical
research; making the case for steady
and sustained support for the National
Institutes of Health.
The 2016 Fellows, comprised of
eleven graduate students, postdoctoral
scientists, and junior faculty, visited fifty-seven
congressional offices from all over the country.
Fellows informed their congressional delegation that
their home institutions are under great stress, with
pharmacology and other related departments often
smaller than they were just a few years ago. Fellows
questioned the viability of their institutions and the
country’s biomedical research enterprise if the next
decade is anything like the past ten years. Another
recurring theme was that once labs close and jobs
are lost, it is very difficult to bring the infrastructure
and intellectual capital back in their home districts.
Fellows did an excellent job of incorporating state
funding data into their discussions, and all of them
offered to make themselves available to their
congressional offices as a future resource or host at
their respective institutions.
2015 Washington Fellow Philip Saccone, a
graduate student from the University of Michigan
Medical Center, appropriately asserts that effective
advocacy requires a consistent effort for a relatively
long period of time: “Advocates need to make an
effort to build a relationship with members and their
staff, and to be a resource for them on a particular
issue. The political landscape is always shifting,
and you never know where or when an opportunity
will arise—it may appear in the most unlikely of
circumstances and be delivered by the most unlikely
people. Much like research, advocacy requires
persistence and resilience. If you’re not involved,
you can’t expect to have a seat at the table when
something important comes up.”
ASPET would like to thank and acknowledge the
commitment and great effort by the 2016 Washington
Fellows for being great representatives of ASPET,
advocates for biomedical research, and future
leaders!
Lauren Haar of Loyola University of Chicago following her meeting with Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).
Susanna Aguirre, ASPET’s manager of government affairs and science policy, Congressman James P. McGovern (MA-02), and Allyson Marshall of the University of Massachusetts School of Medicine.
106
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Program Mission
The mission of the ASPET Washington Fellows Program is to enable developing and early career scientists interested in science policy to learn about and become more engaged in public policy issues. Fellows will develop an understanding of how public policy decisions made in Washington help shape and impact science policy, such as funding for the National Institutes of Health and other science agencies. Fellows will also learn how to advocate eff ectively on Capitol Hill and in their home districts. This program will help Fellows develop the skills and insights to become future leaders in science.
What Will ASPET Fellows Do?
Advocate on Capitol Hill: ASPET Fellows will come to Washington, DC, to meet with their congressional delegation to advocate for biomedical research and increased funding for the NIH. Fellows will be well trained by ASPET and prepared with the appropriate message to deliver to Congress. ASPET will cover transportation costs, hotel, and other reasonable expenses that follow ASPET’s reimbursement policy.
Become Advocates in their Home Districts: ASPET Fellows will meet with Members of Congress in their home district, act as a conduit to inform colleagues within their departments/institutions about federal legislative matters, write op-ed pieces to local papers, etc. All these activities will be undertaken with the support and advice of ASPET.
Attend the ASPET Annual Meeting at Experimental Biology 2017: ASPET Fellows will receive complimentary registration to attend the 2017 ASPET Annual Meeting in Chicago.
Who Should Apply?
The ASPET Washington Fellows Program is open to any graduate student, postdoctoral trainee, or researcher no more than four years past the completion of his/her postdoctoral training. Applicants must be members of ASPET in good standing and have a strong interest in science and its intersection with public policy. Fellows will be selected by the ASPET Science Policy Committee.
Application Information
ASPET anticipates up to 10 Washington Fellows Program participants in 2017. Fellows serve one-year terms.
All applications must contain the following information and be submitted by September 6, 2016, as a single combined PDF:
A letter (no more than two pages) from the applicant stating their interest in public policy and why they are interested in the ASPET Washington Fellows Program A Curriculum Vitae A letter of support from the candidate’s mentor and/or department chair
Incomplete applications and/or applications received after September 6, 2016, will not be considered.
aspet.org
2017 Washington Fellows Program
Submit your application by September 6, 2016
For more info:www.aspet.org/ASPET_Washington_Fellows_Program(301) 634-7060publicaff [email protected]
S
2017 Wash Fellows Flyer.indd 1 5/26/2016 11:50:30 AM
107
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Program Mission
The mission of the ASPET Washington Fellows Program is to enable developing and early career scientists interested in science policy to learn about and become more engaged in public policy issues. Fellows will develop an understanding of how public policy decisions made in Washington help shape and impact science policy, such as funding for the National Institutes of Health and other science agencies. Fellows will also learn how to advocate eff ectively on Capitol Hill and in their home districts. This program will help Fellows develop the skills and insights to become future leaders in science.
What Will ASPET Fellows Do?
Advocate on Capitol Hill: ASPET Fellows will come to Washington, DC, to meet with their congressional delegation to advocate for biomedical research and increased funding for the NIH. Fellows will be well trained by ASPET and prepared with the appropriate message to deliver to Congress. ASPET will cover transportation costs, hotel, and other reasonable expenses that follow ASPET’s reimbursement policy.
Become Advocates in their Home Districts: ASPET Fellows will meet with Members of Congress in their home district, act as a conduit to inform colleagues within their departments/institutions about federal legislative matters, write op-ed pieces to local papers, etc. All these activities will be undertaken with the support and advice of ASPET.
Attend the ASPET Annual Meeting at Experimental Biology 2017: ASPET Fellows will receive complimentary registration to attend the 2017 ASPET Annual Meeting in Chicago.
Who Should Apply?
The ASPET Washington Fellows Program is open to any graduate student, postdoctoral trainee, or researcher no more than four years past the completion of his/her postdoctoral training. Applicants must be members of ASPET in good standing and have a strong interest in science and its intersection with public policy. Fellows will be selected by the ASPET Science Policy Committee.
Application Information
ASPET anticipates up to 10 Washington Fellows Program participants in 2017. Fellows serve one-year terms.
All applications must contain the following information and be submitted by September 6, 2016, as a single combined PDF:
A letter (no more than two pages) from the applicant stating their interest in public policy and why they are interested in the ASPET Washington Fellows Program A Curriculum Vitae A letter of support from the candidate’s mentor and/or department chair
Incomplete applications and/or applications received after September 6, 2016, will not be considered.
aspet.org
2017 Washington Fellows Program
Submit your application by September 6, 2016
For more info:www.aspet.org/ASPET_Washington_Fellows_Program(301) 634-7060publicaff [email protected]
S
2017 Wash Fellows Flyer.indd 1 5/26/2016 11:50:30 AM
Education NewsIntroducing the Pharmacology Education Project (PEP)
Many educators have
scoured the Internet
using a search engine
to find just the right
presentation or part of
a presentation that can
be used in teaching
pharmacology. Students,
too, use a search engine
to find pharmacology-
related content for their
use in education or
research. The results
are often disappointing.
This was the rationale
behind the creation
of the International
Union of Basic and
Clinical Pharmacology
(IUPHAR) Pharmacology
Education Project (PEP).
With initial funding from
the American Society
for Pharmacology
and Experimental
Therapeutics (ASPET),
the dream of a site where
students and educators
can find curated
pharmacology content is
becoming a reality. We are
pleased to announce the availability of the IUPHAR
PEP website, www.pharmacologyeducation.org.
The IUPHAR PEP developed out of the need to
deliver an online resource with a clear educational
focus as a complement to the Guide to Pharmacology.
The IUPHAR PEP is a simple, attractive, easily
searchable resource that supports students of
pharmacological and other biomedical sciences such
as medicine, nursing, and pharmacy, as well as those
who teach them. The project should be particularly
attractive to those in resource-poor countries or
where pharmacology is less well developed.
The layout of the PEP website is divided into four
main sections (Principles of Pharmacology, Principles
of Clinical Pharmacology, Drugs, and Therapeutics),
each comprised of several modules (e.g., adverse
drug reactions under Principles of Pharmacology)
that, in turn, are divided into topics (e.g.
pharmacovigilance under adverse drug reactions).
The format for each topic includes a brief summary of
the topic followed by curated and annotated links to
other resources.
The Project is led by Simon Maxwell, secretary,
IUPHAR-Education Section and University of
Edinburgh, UK, and John Szarek, councilor, ASPET
Division of Pharmacology Education and The
Commonwealth Medical College, Scranton PA. They
convened an inaugural Editorial Board comprised of
an international group of educators and innovators
in pharmacology education, including Leszek
Wojnowski, University Medical Center, Mainz,
Germany; Antonio Sarikas, Technische Universität,
Munich, Germany; Elizabeth Davis, Monash
University, Australia; Kelly Karpa, Penn State College
of Medicine, United States; and Chay-Hoon Tan,
National University of Singapore, Singapore. Elena
Faccenda is the curator of the IUPHAR PEP website.
108
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
The current resources found on the PEP website
represent only the beginning of a project that
we hope will grow rapidly and be utilized by the
international community of pharmacologists. There is
much more still to be developed, and we look forward
to contributions from the international pharmacology
community to expand the website’s offerings.
The IUPHAR PEP has the potential to significantly
enhance pharmacology knowledge and learning
across many disciplines worldwide. To achieve this,
we need you to consider contributing materials and
then point relevant learners (e.g., your students)
toward them. Whatever your research interests are
in pharmacology, there will be a part of the site that
you can contribute to or improve. Please take this
opportunity to familiarize yourself with the site and
then consider contributing to the project. We also are
looking for partners to help with funding. Please write
to us at [email protected].
Simon Maxwell, Co-Lead, IUPHAR PEP
John L. Szarek, Co-Lead, IUPHAR PEP
Elena Faccenda, Curator, IUPHAR PEP
ASPET Names 2016 Individual Summer Undergraduate Research Fellows
The ASPET Summer Undergraduate Research
Fellowship (SURF) program is designed to introduce
undergraduate students to pharmacology research
through a 10-week summer laboratory research
experience. The goal of the program is to use
authentic, mentored research experiences in
pharmacology to heighten student interest in careers
in research and related health care disciplines.
ASPET offers both institutional and individual SURF
awards. Institutions with funded fellowship programs
are listed at: http://bit.ly/1rbToje. The individual
fellowships are designed to support students whose
home campus lacks an institutional program or who
seek more specialized training opportunities at a
different university.
ASPET congratulates the
six students selected for 2016
individual fellowships:
William Capell, a student
at the University of South
Carolina, will conduct
research with Dr. Michy
Kelly at the University of
South Carolina School of
Medicine. Mr. Capell studies
the cAMP/cGMP-degrading enzyme PDE11A4, which
is preferentially expressed in the hippocampal
formation in the brain. Subcellular compartment-
specific dysfunction in cyclic nucleotide signaling is
associated with neuropsychiatric disease. Mr. Capell
aims to uncover the intramolecular signals controlling
PDE11A4 compartmentalization and catalytic activity
to identify novel mechanisms for therapeutically
targeting this enzyme.
Ashton Faler, a student
at the University of Findlay
College of Pharmacy, will
conduct research in the
lab of Dr. Ryan Schneider.
Ms. Faler will build on Dr.
Schneider’s lab’s efforts to
investigate the anti-cancer
effects of synthetic chalcone
and flavonoid derivatives in
several human glioblastoma
cell lines. Additionally, she
will attempt to elucidate
the mechanism(s) of these
derivatives by investigating
cell death pathways.
William CapellUniversity of South Carolina
Ashton FalerUniversity of Findlay College of Pharmacy
109
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Dillion Hutson, a student
at Tulane University, will
conduct research with Dr.
Sarah Lindsey at the Tulane
University School of Medicine.
Mr. Hutson’s project will
characterize transcriptional
effects of the G protein-
coupled estrogen receptor
(GPER). Although GPCRs
are not normally associated
with transcriptional effects,
research from Dr. Lindsey’s
lab has consistently found
that GPER activation induces
genomic changes. Mr. Hutson will investigate whether
these effects occur in response to cAMP activation or
an alternative pathway.
Scott King, a student
at Washington & Jefferson
College, will conduct research
with Dr. Catherine Davis at
the Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine. Mr. King’s
research will test therapies
aimed at eliminating cognitive
impairment following
radiation exposure. He will
evaluate the effectiveness
of erythropoietin in reducing
these impairments using a
rodent behavioral model. His
work is designed to address
the lack of effective treatments for radiation-induced
cognitive impairments and to better understand the
mechanisms of radiation damage to the CNS.
Rebecca Spry, a student
at Oglethorpe University,
will conduct research in the
lab of Dr. Kevin Murnane at
Mercer University. Ms. Spry
will study new treatments
for Parkinson’s disease (PD),
focusing on Omega-3 fatty
acids that preserve neurons
and normalize dopamine
neurotransmitter levels. These
are hallmark symptoms of PD,
and current PD therapeutics
do not address all of these
symptoms.
Nathan Wainscott, a
student at the University
of Louisville, will conduct
research in the lab of Dr. J.
Christopher States at the
University of Louisville School
of Medicine. Mr. Wainscott
will be testing the ability of
several lead compounds
targeting the anaphase
promoting complex to arrest
the cell cycle and induce
apoptosis in lung cancer cell
lines. He will then determine
the cell cycle phase in which
this arrest is induced by the presence of specific
cycle markers.
Scott KingWashington & Jefferson College
Rebecca SpryOglethorpe University
Nathan WainscottUniversity of Louisville
Dillion HutsonTulane University
We wish the 2016 individual fellows as well as the fellows participating in the
SURF institutional programs a productive and fun summer of research!
110
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Journals News
The Board of Publications Trustees is pleased to
welcome the following new editorial board members
since the last issue of The Pharmacologist.
Drug Metabolism and Disposition added Dr. Yurong
Lai with Bristol-Myers Squibb and the University of
Rhode Island to the Editorial Advisory Board.
Dr. Andrea Cignarella with the University of Padova
joined the JPET Editorial Advisory Board.
Molecular Pharmacology’s Editorial Advisory
Board added Dr. Henrik Dohlman, University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill; Dr. Kasper Hansen, University
of Montana; Dr. Shelley Hooks, University of Georgia
College of Pharmacy; Dr. Adriano Marchese, Medical
College of Wisconsin; Dr. Robyn Meech, Flinders
University of South Australia; Dr. Zhi Shi, Jinan
University; Dr. Greg Tall, University of Rochester;
Dr. Joanne Wang, University of Washington; and Dr.
Wen Xie, University of Pittsburgh. Dr. Alan Smrcka,
University of Rochester, is now an associate editor for
the journal.
New Editorial Board Members
Improvements to Manuscript Submission Process
ASPET’s journals will move to single PDF
manuscript submission in the near future. Source
files for text and images will not be required until
acceptance once the new workflow is put into place.
Authors will submit a single PDF file containing the
manuscript and all figures for initial submission and
revisions. This should ease the submission process.
The manuscript submission system BenchPress
implemented a drag-and-drop feature for ASPET’s
journals recently. This makes it easier and much faster
to upload source files.
ASPET’s journals department staff members
have been working with BenchPress to implement
improvements to the manuscript submission process
for authors, reviewers, and editors. Look for more
improvements in the coming months. Although we
work to prevent problems, staff members are available
by email and telephone to step in when authors need
help. Contact us at [email protected] or by calling
301-634-7060 Monday through Friday from 8:00AM -
5:00PM for assistance or to answer questions.
Publish your paper in an ASPET Journal
Infl uential Journals...
aspetjournals.orgJournals of the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Journals Brochure Ad 2016_Updated 2-26-2016.indd 1 3/7/2016 3:29:27 PM
111
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Publish your paper in an ASPET Journal
Infl uential Journals...
aspetjournals.orgJournals of the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Journals Brochure Ad 2016_Updated 2-26-2016.indd 1 3/7/2016 3:29:27 PM
112
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Membership News
Dale Louise Birkle Dreer,
chief of the Office of Scientific
Review at the National Center for
Complementary and Integrative
Health (NCCIH), National
Institutes of Health (NIH), passed
away on Saturday, March 12, 2016
after a brief illness. Dale was
born November 11, 1955 in Fort
Eustice, Virginia. She received a
BS in chemistry from Bridgewater College and a PhD
in pharmacology and toxicology from the Medical
College of Virginia in 1982 under the tutelage of Dr.
Earl F. Ellis, investigating the effects of norepinephrine
on arachidonic acid metabolism in feline cerebral
cortex and murine neuroblastoma cells.
Following graduation, Dale pursued post-doctoral
studies with Dr. Nicolas Bazan at the Louisiana
State University Medical Center in New Orleans,
where she studied arachidonic acid metabolism
and lipoxygenase activity in the retina and cornea,
and characterized the increase in free fatty acids in
brain and neuronal cultures in response to increased
neuronal activity.
In 1988, Dale accepted a faculty position in the
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology at West
Virginia University (WVU) Medical Center led by Dr.
Bill Fleming. During the 12 years Dale spent at WVU,
she established an independent NIH-funded research
program, mentored 4 PhD students, and rose
through the ranks from assistant to full professor.
Her initial focus characterized seizure-induced
alterations in free fatty acids and diacyglycerols,
following which she became very interested in
stress and corticotropin-releasing factor. These
studies represented the primary focus of Dale’s
efforts until 2000, when she left academia to serve
as a grants administrator for the National Center for
Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM,
which became NCCIH) at the NIH.
Dale’s scientific expertise on brain structure and
function, particularly as related to the consequence
of drugs and environmental insult exposure, in
concert with her commitment to research, led to
her well-deserved promotion in 2009 to chief of
NCCAM’s Office of Scientific Review.
In addition to her scientific endeavors, Dale was
active in her community serving as parliamentarian
for the American Society for Neurochemistry (ASN)
from 1995-2001 and as a member of ASPET’s
Program Committee from 2004-2009. At the ASPET
Graduate Student-Postdoctoral Colloquium at EB2015
in Boston, Dale presented a talk entitled “Working for
America” that was very interesting and well received
by all.
Dale is survived by her husband Duane Dreer,
her stepson Jacob Dreer, her sister Karen and
her brother Kent and his wife Rene. Beyond her
scientific expertise, Dale was known for her patience,
infectious smile, and personality. We will all miss
her greatly.
Dale was a member of ASPET since 1993.
Submitted by Lynn Wecker, PhD
A Tribute to Dr. Dale Louise Birkle Dreer (1955-2016)
Dr. Dreer
113
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Dr. Nancy Rutledge Zahniser,
PhD, passed away peacefully at
her home in Denver, Colorado
on May 5, 2016 after being
diagnosed with neuroglioblastoma
in December 2014. Dr. Zahniser
was born on October 26, 1948
and raised in Chillicothe, OH. She
received a PhD in pharmacology
in 1977 from the University of
Pittsburgh. Dr. Zahniser did her postdoctoral training
in the lab of Dr. Perry Molinoff in the Department of
Pharmacology, School of Medicine at the University of
Colorado Health Sciences Center (UCHSC) in Denver,
CO. Subsequently, Dr. Zahniser was hired by the
UCHSC Department of Pharmacology as a tenure-track
assistant professor in 1981, rising quickly through the
ranks to become full professor with tenure in 1991. Dr.
Zahniser also held concurrent faculty appointments in
the neuroscience program and the medical student
training program at the University of Colorado School
of Medicine.
Dr. Zahniser’s research focused on better
understanding the brain neurotransmitter dopamine
(DA) and the addictive drugs that alter its function.
She was the first to demonstrate that DA receptor
binding is influenced by guanine nucleotides and that
release regulating presynaptic D2 DA autoreceptors
exist on rat striatal neurons. Her research was
continuously funded by the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) since 1981, including by RCDA, MERIT
and Senior Scientist awards from the National
Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). She was thoroughly
committed to helping both graduate students and
postdoctoral trainees advance their own careers,
mentoring the research projects of 9 thesis students
and 22 postdoctoral fellows in her lab. Together,
they have published over 150 papers, reviews and
book chapters. Many of Dr. Zahniser’s graduate
students and postdoctoral trainees now run their own
independent neuroscience laboratories.
In addition to serving as vice-chair and acting chair of
the Department of Pharmacology from 2003-2006, Dr.
Zahniser was also the CU School of Medicine associate
dean for research education from 2007-2012, serving
as a resource for persons applying for training grants,
fellowships, and career awards. Dr. Zahniser directed an
NIAAA-supported postdoctoral training grant, NIGMS-
funded predoctoral pharmacology training grant and
ASPET-supported Summer Undergraduate Research
Fellowship program for under-represented students.
She served as a regular member of two NIH study
sections, the NIDA National Advisory Council and the
NIDA Intramural Research Program Board of Scientific
Counselors, as well as an ad hoc member of numerous
other National Science Foundation (NSF) and NIH review
panels. In addition to a very active history of reviewing for
all the major neuroscience and pharmacology journals, Dr.
Zahniser was on the editorial boards of Pharmacological
Communications, CNS Neuroscience and Therapeutics
and the Journal of Neuroscience Methods.
Dr. Zahniser was a member of the American
Society for Pharmacology and Experimental
Therapeutics (ASPET) since 1982 and a member of the
Society for Neuroscience since 1979. She received
the Award in Excellence in Pharmacology/Toxicology
from the PhRMA Foundation honoring her career
achievements in the field of dopamine regulation in
drug addiction in both 1984 and 2014. She served on
the ASPET Council as Secretary–Treasurer in 2001–
2002 and was selected as a fellow in the prestigious
Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM)
program for women in 2005–2006.
Dr. Zahniser’s absence will be felt by the multitudes
of former students, post-docs and young faculty who
Nancy tirelessly and generously supported over the
years. She made a point at every scientific conference
to attend their presentations, read their grant
proposals and give them advice on new techniques
or collaborations to further their careers. Nancy was a
highly ethical scientist who was a role model for many.
Submitted by Habibeh Khoshbouei, PhD and Joanna Peris, PhD
A Tribute to Dr. Nancy Rutledge Zahniser (1948-2016)
Dr. Zahniser
114
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
REGULAR MEMBERS Eric Blomme, AbbVie, IL
Mitsi A. Blount, Emory Univ, GA
Dion R. Brocks, Univ of Alberta, Canada
Amanda Brooks, North Dakota State Univ
Alexander Bryant, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, MA
Ping Chen, Mayo Clinic, MN
Shao-yu Chen, Univ of Louisville, KY
Blaise M. Costa, Virginia Coll of Osteopathic Med
Ivan L. Csanaky, Children’s Mercy Hospital & Clinics, MO
Paul A. Davies, Tufts Univ - Sch of Med, MA
Ellen J. Hess, Emory Univ - Sch of Med, GA
Peter J. Houghton, Univ of Texas HSC, San Antonio
Ying Huang, Western Univ of Health Sciences, CA
Junguk Hur, Univ of North Dakota
Takanari Inoue, Johns Hopkins Univ, MD
Srinivas R. Iyengar, Icahn Sch of Med at Mount Sinai, NY
Anand Iyer, Hampton Univ - Sch of Pharmacy, VA
Shankaranarayanan Jeyakodi, OmniActive Health Technologies Inc., India
Haitao Ji, Univ of Utah
Vijaya Juturu, OmniActive Health Technologies Inc., NJ
Kishore K. Katyayan, Eli Lilly & Company, IN
Seher A. Khan, Lake Erie Coll of Osteopathic Med, PA
Yu Shin Kim, Univ of Texas Med Branch
Caroline Lee, Ardea Biosciences, CA
Xue-Qing Li, AstraZeneca R&D Gothenburg, Sweden
Michael P. Maher, Janssen R&D, LLC, CA
Paul G. Mermelstein, Univ of Minnesota
Grover P. Miller, Univ of Arkansas for Med Sciences
Miguel Muzzio, IITRI, IL
S. Priya Narayanan, GA
Theresa V. Nguyen, Merck Research Labs, NJ
Chidi I. Nosiri, Abia State Univ, Nigeria
Ritu Singh, Corning Life Sciences, MA
Kunhua Song, Univ of Colorado - Sch of Med
David Sweatt, Vanderbilt Univ, TN
Douglas D. Thomas, Univ of Illinois at Chicago
Dong Wang, Univ of California, San Diego
Thomas F. Woolf, Biotranex, NJ
Zhengping Yi, Wayne State Univ, MI
POSTDOCTORAL MEMBERS Jonah S. Aprioku, Univ of Port
Harcourt, Nigeria
David I. Brown, Univ of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Sugasini Dhavamani, Univ of Illinois
Matthew W. Gorr, CA
Sandeep Kumar Kumar, Washington Univ - Sch of Med, MO
Guruprasad Kuntamallappanavar, Univ of Tennessee HSC
Dorwin Z. Lajot, DL Nutritional Consultancy & Supply, Philippines
Daniel E. O’Brien, Vanderbilt Univ, TN
Peter O. Oladimeji, St. Jude Children’s Res Hospital, TN
AFFILIATE MEMBERSSarah R. Anthony, Univ of
Cincinnati, OH
Cindy B. McReynolds, EicOsis, CA
GRADUATE STUDENT MEMBERSKodye L. Abbott, Auburn Univ, AL
Mohammed M. Alhadidy, Univ of South Florida - Morsani Coll of Med
William R. Arnold, Univ of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Aria L. Byrd, Emory Univ, GA
Gisela A. Camacho Hernandez, Univ Autonoma de Baja California, Mexico
Kirti K. Chahal, Guru Jambheshwar Univ of Science & Technology, CA
Somenath R. Chowdhury, CSIR-Indian Inst of Chemical Biology, Kolkata, India
Emily E. Delman, Wright State Univ, OH
Samuel C. Eaton, Univ of North Carolina
Joseph O. Emudainohwo, Delta State Univ, Abraka, Nigeria
Eric E. Figueroa, Vanderbilt Univ, TN
Johanna Finn, Univ of Illinois at Chicago
Courtney A. Follit, Southern Methodist Univ, TX
Kuljeet Gugnani, MCPHS Univ, MA
Joo-Hui Han, Chungnam National Univ - Coll of Pharmacy, South Korea
Benedicta U. Iwuagwu, Robert Gordon Univ, UK
Mohd M. Khan, Univ of Maryland - School of Pharmacy, Baltimore
Krishnaprasad G. Koorse, CoVAS Mannuthy, India
Andrew G. Kunihiro, Univ of Arizona, AZ
Montserrat A. Lara Velazquez, Johns Hopkins Univ, MD
Ashok Mandala, CSIR-Indian Inst of Chemical Biology, India
Michelle E. Martino, Rutgers Univ, NJ
Tanzir B. Mortuza, Univ of Georgia
Hannah V. Oakes, East Tennessee State Univ
Bolape A. Oyekanmi, Federal Univ of Technology, Akure, Nigeria
Anastasia Robinson, Howard Univ, DC
New Members
115
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Yalin S. Sahin, Hacettepe Univ, Turkey
Aishwarya Sathyanarayan, Univ of Minnesota
Shenghua Y. Sinkler, Univ of Missouri
Dheeraj Soni, Univ of Illinois at Chicago
Phillip A. Starski, Mayo Clinic, MN
Andrew D. van der Vaart, Virginia Commonwealth Univ
Brayden D. Whitlock, Univ of Alberta, Canada
Aurellia Whitmore, Florida A&M Univ
Andrew L. Willeford, Univ of California, San Diego
Amirah F. Yusuf, Univ of Ibadan, Nigeria
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT MEMBERSSavannah J. Afsahi, Nanomedical
Diagnostics, CA
Naishka Caldero, Univ of Puerto Rico
William R. Capell, Univ of South Carolina
Brandon D. Griess, California State Univ, Northridge
Meagan E. Hackey, Roger Williams Univ, RI
Lauren E. Harbaugh, St. Vincent Coll, PA
Trinity A. Kronk, Emory Univ, GA
Krista M. Lotesto, IL
Abigail E. Moore, Michigan State Univ
Elsa J. Rosario, Queens Coll, NY
Julie A. Rutkauskas, St. Vincent Coll, PA
Eric J. Witherspoon, Morehouse Coll, MO
George M. Yoshida, Univ of Cincinnati, OH
In SympathyDale Louise Birkle Dreer
James Fisher
Ronald L. Williams
Nancy Rutledge Zahniser
We would like to congratulate Dr. Michael Tranter on being the grand prize
winner of the $100.00 AMEX gift card for participating in the ASPET 2015-2016
Member-Get-A-Member program. All participants in the program received an
ASPET logo T-shirt this year. Thanks to the recruiting effort of our members,
we welcomed 19 new members this year through the Member-Get-A-Member
program. We appreciate your contribution to the growth of ASPET.
116
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
■ ASPET Annual Meeting/ASPET meetings• Submit a symposium proposal
• Nominate a colleague, peer, or yourself for a scientific
achievement award
• Attend the ASPET Business Meeting and Awards
Presentation at Experimental Biology (EB)
• Participate at your division’s annual meeting at EB
• Volunteer to help judge your division’s poster competition at EB
• Submit an abstract to EB in an ASPET topic category
• Give back to the community through the Day of Service at EB
■ Divisions• Send updates and ideas for consideration to your division’s Communications Officer (e.g., content
suggestions for the web, news and achievements of fellow pharmacologists for Members in the News,
LinkedIn discussion ideas)
• Be sure to sign up for primary or secondary membership in divisions of interest
• Join your division’s LinkedIn group page if they have one so you can contribute to the conversation
• Students and postdocs: apply to be part of your division’s best presentation competition(s) at EB
■ Education• Order copies of Explore Pharmacology, ASPET’s booklet on careers, research, and other opportunities
within the discipline, to hand out at your institution or at meetings
• Suggest educational resources for the website
■ Journals • Contribute; use what you know to benefit the entire discipline by submitting papers
• Volunteer; put your time and talent to good use by volunteering to review for any of our journals
• Encourage your library to subscribe to ASPET’s journals or maintain the subscriptions they currently have
■ Leadership• Nominate a colleague, peer, or yourself for an elected position
• Vote in elections and bylaws changes
• Volunteer to serve on an ASPET committee – contact committee chairs about potential openings
HOW TO GET INVOLVED IN
117
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
■ Membership• Help grow the Society by participating in the Member-Get-A-Member recruiting program.
• Join one of ASPET’s regional chapters
• Donate to any of our funds; contributions to ASPET funds help support research, travel awards, science
advocacy and career development
• Respond to ASPET surveys to help us improve your experience
• If you are a department chair, encourage recruitment and/or participate in a recruitment campaign. ASPET
can supply the chair with membership applications attached to a packet of membership information.
• Pass out ASPET marketing materials (e.g., member benefits pamphlet, brochures for programs of interest)
to individuals you think would be interested (contact ASPET for details on obtaining materials)
■ Programs• Undergraduates and faculty mentors: apply for the Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship program
• Graduate students and post-docs: apply for the Washington Fellows program
• Graduate students and post-docs: apply for the Mentoring Network program; faculty: apply to be a mentor
■ Science Policy• Contact your Congressional offices on the importance of appropriations for federally funded science
agencies
• Write an op-ed piece in your local newspaper regarding the importance of biomedical research funding
■ Writing • Propose a topic and submit a written article for consideration by The Pharmacologist; submissions can be
sent to [email protected]
• Contribute to Pharm Talk, ASPET’s blog for young scientists; submissions for consideration can be sent to
• Volunteer to write articles or news updates for your division to appear in The Pharmacologist or on the
website; contact your division’s communications officer
These are some of the most common ways to get involved, but there are many possibilities for member
engagement. We encourage you to reach out to us through [email protected] with your ideas. Here are some
general tips to keep in mind:
• Include detailed information in your request for getting involved, including specific aspects of the Society
or area(s) of interest
• Route your request appropriately; staff, division leadership, and committee leadership are generally the
most appropriate points of contact. If you need more help contacting a specific individual, get in touch with
us via [email protected]
• Stay informed about opportunities by following us on Facebook and Twitter and reading our NewsBrief;
make sure you are receiving our direct emails as well
One of the questions we hear most frequently from members is “how do I become more engaged with the society?” Whether you are looking for leadership opportunities,
developmental experiences, networking, or a chance to be more involved in divisions and committees,
there are many opportunities for engagement in the work of the society. Below are some of the ways you
can contribute to ASPET while furthering your own growth and professional development.
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
118
Members in the News
Achievements, Awards, Promotions, and Scientific Breakthroughs
Namandje N. Bumpus, PhDNamandje Bumpus was recently
named as one of 105 innovative
scientists to receive a Presidential
Early Career Award for Scientists and
Engineers this year. This extremely
prestigious award is the highest honor
given by the United States government
for early career investigators employed
by or funded by a number of different
departments or agencies. The award
was conferred by President Obama in
a ceremony at the White House.
Dr. Bumpus, currently an associate
professor of pharmacology, has been
on the faculty at Johns Hopkins
University since 2010. She is funded
by the Department of Health and
Human Services with an R01 from
the NIGMS titled “Cellular Signaling
in Drug-induced Toxicity” and a
U19 project from the NIAID titled
“Tissue Pharmacology Imaging and
Modeling.” Overall, her laboratory
studies drug metabolism, focusing
specifically on drugs used to
prevent and treat HIV infection
and determining whether genetic
differences alter drug metabolism
and thus clinical efficacy. Dr. Bumpus
previously won the 2015 Division
for Drug Metabolism Early Career
Achievement Award for this work.
She has served as councilor of the
Division for Drug Metabolism and will
be the Division Secretary/Treasurer-
Elect starting July 1, 2016.
Dr. Bumpus has been a member of
ASPET since 2008. She is a member
of the Division for Drug Metabolism,
the Division for Translational and
Clinical Pharmacology, and the
Division for Toxicology.
Atul Laddu, MD, PhDDr. Atul Laddu founded Georgia
Thrombosis Forum (GTF), an affiliate
of the North American Thrombosis
Forum (NATF). Under his direction, a
team of volunteers has been working
since 2012 to promote awareness of
the deadly conditions of deep vein
thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary
embolism (PE) in the state of Georgia.
Statistics indicate one clot develops
every minute, and one patient dies
of clots every six minutes. DVT and
PE affect over 900,000 people in the
United States annually, resulting in
high mortality rates. An immediate
need thus exists to spread public
awareness and promote networks to
support organizations such as the GTF.
Dr. Laddu and Ms. Richa Bhome, a
9th grader and contributing author to
this article, along with several other
GTF volunteers have made significant
contributions to spreading awareness
of thrombosis in Georgia communities.
These include receiving recognition
Dr. Namandje Bumpus
Johns Hopkins University
Dr. Atul Laddu
Georgia Thrombosis
Forum (GTF)
119
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
GTF members
Joanna Jacob
Virginia Commonwealth
University
by Georgia Governor Nathan Deal
awarding the GTF a proclamation for
Thrombosis Awareness Month. The
GTF is run with the efforts of young
and adult community volunteers under
the mentorship of Dr. Laddu. Many
young GTF volunteers have written
articles featured on the NATF website
(www.natfonline.org) regarding
educational activities and the work
done by the volunteers in the
community. Additional achievements
for the GTF include media recognition
and the Highest Award of Excellence
to Dr. Laddu for community service
by Governor Deal. Dr. Laddu has
also spearheaded opportunities
for the GTF’s young members to
receive internships at Harvard and
Loyola Universities and to make
presentations in front of faculty.
According to Dr. Laddu, the GTF’s
future plans include moving forward
with the young volunteers to conduct
research in different countries
and find relationships between
different conditions and thrombosis.
The direction for the GTF is at the
grassroots level because “the youth
are the future of GTF, and the future
is here.”
Dr. Laddu has been a retired
member of ASPET since 1972. He
is a member of the Division for
Cardiovascular Pharmacology and
the Division for Translational and
Clinical Pharmacology.
Joanna JacobJoanna “Jacy” Jacob and Andrew
van der Vaart, graduate students in
the Department of Pharmacology and
Toxicology at Virginia Commonwealth
University won the 2016 Lab Grammy
Song Parody of the Year Award for
their video “We Found Drugs,” which
parodied the song “We Found Love”
by Rihanna. They competed against
ten videos from various scientific disci-
plines in this year’s Lab Grammy Song
Parody competition. The video sends
a humorous and educational message
to students to consider pharmacology
as a career. Ms. Jacob researches the
effects of ethanol on opioid tolerance
with Dr. William L. Dewey, professor
and chair of the Department of Phar-
macology and Toxicology at Virginia
Commonwealth University.
Ms. Jacob has been a member
of ASPET since 2015. She is
a member of the Division for
Neuropharmacology,
the Division
for Behavioral
Pharmacology, the
Division for Molecular
Pharmacology, the
Division for Toxicology,
and the Division for
Translational and
Clinical Pharmacology.
120
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Division News2016 Division Award Winners
(1) BEH Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prizes were awarded to Jacques Nguyen (1st), Jessica Anand (2nd), Brenda Gannon (2nd), and Sarah Withey (2nd).
(2) BEH Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the undergraduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Caitlin Labay (1st) and Mary Logan (2nd).
(3) CVP Trainee Showcase Winners (Oral Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes for trainee talks were awarded to Kristin Luther (1st), Nadia Ayala-Lopez (2nd) (not pictured), and Goutham Vasam (3rd).
(4) DM Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Julie Lade (1st), Joseph Jilek (2nd), and Faith Stevison (3rd).
BEH = Division for Behavioral PharmacologyDCP = Division for Cancer PharmacologyCVP = Division for Cardiovascular PharmacologyDDD = Division for Drug Discovery and DevelopmentDM = Division for Drug Metabolism
MOL = Division for Molecular PharmacologyNEU = Division for NeuropharmacologyDPE = Division for Pharmacology EducationTOX = Division for ToxicologyTCP = Division for Translational and Clinical Pharmacology
2
1
43
121
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
(1) DCP Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the undergraduate student category, the top prize was awarded to Gloria Le (1st). In the graduate student category, top prizes were awarded to Chen Shan Woodcock (1st) and Kristan Cleveland (2nd). In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prize was awarded to Shu Zhou (1st).
(2) CVP Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Krish-naraj Rathod (1st), Alexa Hendricks (2nd), Santosh Suryavanshi (3rd), and Lingxin Zhang (HM) (not pictured).
(3) BEH Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Rachel Altshuler (1st) and Fernando Moura (2nd).
(4) CVP Trainee Showcase Winners (Oral Sessions) - In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prizes for trainee talks were awarded to Inigo Valiente-Alandi (1st) and Jacob Myerson (2nd) (not pictured).
(5) CVP Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the undergraduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Patrick Liu (1st) (not pictured) and Brendan Mullan (2nd).
2
1
3
4
5
122
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
(1) TOX Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prizes were awarded to Alessandro Venosa (1st) and Hailiang Liu (2nd) (not pictured).
(2) MOL Best Presentation Competition Winners (Oral Sessions) - In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prizes for oral presentations were awarded to Jennifer Cash (1st), Laurel Grisanti (2nd), and Kathryn Luderman (3rd).
(3) DDD Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the young scientist category, the top prizes were awarded to Jenaye Robinson (1st) and Amit Sharma (2nd).
(4) TOX New Investigator Award winner Jamie J. Bernard, PhD
(5) MOL Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes for poster presentations were awarded to Jason Davis (1st), Doungkamol Alongkronrusmee (finalist), Jugajyoti Baruah (finalist), Robert Cameron (finalist), and Kathryn Livingston (finalist).
(6) TCP Young Investigator Platform Session Winners (Oral Sessions) - In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prizes were awarded to Naeem Patil (1st) and Matthew Jennis (2nd).
4
5
3
12
6
123
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
BEH = Division for Behavioral PharmacologyDCP = Division for Cancer PharmacologyCVP = Division for Cardiovascular PharmacologyDDD = Division for Drug Discovery and DevelopmentDM = Division for Drug Metabolism
MOL = Division for Molecular PharmacologyNEU = Division for NeuropharmacologyDPE = Division for Pharmacology EducationTOX = Division for ToxicologyTCP = Division for Translational and Clinical Pharmacology
(1) TOX Junior Investigator Award winner Brian S. Cummings, PhD
(2) NEU Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the undergraduate student category, the top prizes for poster presentations were awarded to Tyler Hinshaw (1st) and Nicole Colon Carrion (2nd) (not pictured). In the graduate student category, the top prizes for poster presentations were awarded to Sumitra Pati (1st), Sophia Kaska (2nd), and Danielle Tomasello (3rd).
(3) NEU Best Presentation Competition Winners (Oral Sessions) - In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prizes for oral presentations were awarded to Matthew Robson (1st), Erin Calipari (2nd), and Erin Bobeck (3rd).
(4) TCP Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Jamie Moscovitz (1st), Jeremy Miyauchi (2nd), Clark Sims (3rd), Mikeal Boberg (HM) (not pictured), and Blessy George (HM) (not pictured).
(5) TCP Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the undergraduate student category, the top prize was awarded to Mark Wiley (1st).
5
3
4
2
1
124
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
BEH = Division for Behavioral PharmacologyDCP = Division for Cancer PharmacologyCVP = Division for Cardiovascular PharmacologyDDD = Division for Drug Discovery and DevelopmentDM = Division for Drug Metabolism
MOL = Division for Molecular PharmacologyNEU = Division for NeuropharmacologyDPE = Division for Pharmacology EducationTOX = Division for ToxicologyTCP = Division for Translational and Clinical Pharmacology
1
2
3
4 5
6
7
(1) DM Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the postdoctoral scientist category, the top prizes were awarded to Sasmita Tripathy (1st), Luc Rougee (2nd), and Aanchal Mehrotra (3rd).
(2) TOX Career Award winner John D. Schuetz, PhD
(3) TOX Best Presentation Competition Winners (Poster Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Katiria Flores (1st), Souvarish Sarkar (2nd), and Rachel Murphy (3rd).
(4) NEU Early Career Independent Investigator Award winner Ryan A. Drenan, PhD
(5) TCP Young Investigator Platform Session Winners (Oral Sessions) - In the graduate student category, the top prizes were awarded to Amanda Stolarz (1st) and Brett McGregor (2nd).
(6) TCP Awards for the Early Career Faculty Showcase were given to Michelle Kimple and Avner Schlessinger.
(7) DPE Travel Awards for Pharmacology Educators were awarded to Katharina Brandl, PhD and Dovenia Ponnoth, PhD.
125
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
Read about the James R. Gillette Drug Metabolism Best Paper Award winner in the drug transport and
pharmacokinetics category, Dr. Lilly East, in the March 2016 issue of The Pharmacologist: http://bit.ly/1piu9fm
Each year the Division for Drug Metabolism
presents two James R. Gillette Best Paper Awards:
one for the best paper in the area of drug metabolism
and the other for the best paper in drug transport and
pharmacokinetics.
The Gillette award in the drug metabolism category
was given to Yun-Chen Tien, PhD, for her work done in
the laboratory of Xiaobo Zhong, PhD, at the University
of Connecticut. Dr. Tien received a cash award and
certificate, and this work was presented by Dr. Zhong
at the James Gillette Award and Platform Session at
the 2016 ASPET Annual Meeting in San Diego.
The award-winning paper was titled “Dose of
Phenobarbital and Age of Treatment at Early Life
Are Two Key Factors for the Persistent Induction of
Cytochrome P450 Enzymes in Adult Mouse Liver,” and
was authored by Y.C. Tien, K. Liu, C. Pope, P. Wang,
X. Ma, and X.B. Zhong. The authors investigated
possible consequences on adult drug metabolism
after receiving drug treatment at neonate and infant
stages. Phenobarbital was used as a model drug and
mouse as an in vivo model to demonstrate that the
phenobarbital dose and the age at which treatment
occurred are the two key factors for the persistent
induction of gene expression and consequential
increases of enzyme activities of several tested P450
genes in adult liver. These results may stimulate
studies to evaluate the long-term impacts of drug
treatment with different doses at neonatal and infant
ages in humans on drug metabolism, therapeutic
efficacy, and drug-induced toxicity throughout the rest
of life.
Dr. Tien has been a postdoctoral fellow in Dr.
Zhong’s Lab since 2013. She received her PhD in
pharmacology from China Medical University. In
addition to this award, she also received the first place
Best Presentation Award in the postdoctoral category
at the 19th North American ISSX/29th JSSX meeting
in 2014 and the first place Best Presentation Award in
the postdoctoral category from the Division for Drug
Metabolism at the ASPET Annual Meeting at EB2015.
Dr. Zhong is an associate professor of pharmacology
and toxicology at the University of Connecticut, School
of Pharmacy. He received a PhD degree in molecular
biology from Wageningen University in the Netherlands
and trained as a postdoctoral fellow in genomics at the
Yale University School of Medicine. Dr. Zhong was an
assistant and associate professor at the University of
Kansas Medical Center before he joined the University
of Connecticut in 2012. A former councilor of the
Division for Drug Metabolism, he currently serves
on numerous editorial boards and several NIH study
sections, including Developmental Pharmacology and
Environmental Epigenomics. Dr. Zhong is currently
funded by the National Institutes of General Medical
Sciences and the National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences at the NIH. Research areas in his
laboratory include P450-mediated drug metabolism,
developmental pharmacology, pharmacogenetics, and
pharmacoepigenetics for precision medicine.
The Gillette Award honors the late NIH
Pharmacologist James R. Gillette, Ph.D. (http://dmd.
aspetjournals.org/cgi/reprint/31/12/1474.pdf ), who
was a scholar, scientist, philosopher, and supervisor
of pharmacologists worldwide. During his career,
Gillette published more than 300 papers and chapters
and co-edited seven books. He was considered a
visionary and significant contributor to the field of drug
metabolism and pharmacokinetics.
James R. Gillette Best Paper Award
Dr. Yun-Chen Tien, second from right, first row
126
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Mark T. Nelson, PhD, winner of the Vanhoutte Distinguished Lectureship with Paul M. Vanhoutte, MD, PhD.
Dr. Mark Nelson delivered this year’s Paul M.
Vanhoutte Distinguished Lectureship in Vascular
Pharmacology titled “Capillaries as Decoders of the
Neural Rhythm of the Brain: Translating Thought into
Blood Flow.” This award is sponsored by the Division
for Cardiovascular Pharmacology and was established
to honor Dr. Vanhoutte’s lifelong scientific contributions
to the field of endothelial and vascular smooth muscle
biology and for his outstanding contributions to
mentoring numerous prominent trainees in the field
of vascular physiology and pharmacology. Dr. Nelson
is the chair of the Department of Pharmacology and
distinguished professor at the University of Vermont.
He received a $1000 honorarium, a custom designed
crystal bowl, and travel expenses to the ASPET Annual
Meeting at Experimental Biology 2016. Dr. Nelson
was recognized for his significant contributions to the
field of vascular pharmacology and for his exceptional
mentoring and service to ASPET and the Division for
Cardiovascular Pharmacology.
2016 Paul M. Vanhoutte Distinguished Lectureship in Vascular Pharmacology
127
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
The Academy of Pharmacology Educators
was established in 2010 in order to recognize
individuals who have made exemplary contributions
to pharmacology education in one or more of
the following areas: student-teacher interaction,
innovative contributions, scholarly endeavors,
professional development, and service. Three new
members were inducted into the Academy during
the Annual Meeting of the Division for Pharmacology
Education at EB 2016. More information about the
Academy, including application instructions and a
roster of inductees, can be found at http://www.aspet.
org/Education/Academy.
Academy inductee A. Laurel Gorman, PhD received
her BS in interdisciplinary studies (neurosciences)
from the University of Florida and her PhD in
pharmacology from LSU Medical School. After
completing post-doctoral research
at Weill Cornell Medical College
and the University of Miami School
of Medicine, she joined the faculty
at Nova Southeastern University.
In 2009, she became part of the
Founding Faculty for the University
of Central Florida College of
Medicine. In her 19 plus years of
teaching, she has taught most topics
in pharmacology to medical, dental,
and optometry students and also to
allied health undergraduates in both
small classrooms and large lecture-
style classes. She received a travel
award from ASPET’S Division for
Pharmacology Education in 2013 and
is currently serving on the Executive
Committee of DPE. She has received
multiple teaching awards for her
excellence and creativity in teaching.
Her medical education research
interests include the use of simulations, innovative
and blended learning teaching techniques, and
curriculum development and assessment, all in the
context of pharmacology education.
Academy inductee Nicole C. Kwiek, PhD is clinical
assistant professor and director of undergraduate
studies at the Ohio State University College of
Pharmacy. She received her BS in biochemistry
from Ohio State, a PhD in pharmacology from Duke
University, followed by a postdoctoral fellowship at the
Duke Center for Science Education. Since joining the
OSU faculty, she has received the BS Pharmaceutical
Sciences Distinguished Teaching Award three times.
She currently co-directs the Generation Rx Initiative,
a learning community of Ohio State faculty, staff, and
students studying the problem of prescription drug
abuse. This project, designed to prevent misuse and
Division for Pharmacology Education Inducts Three New Fellows into the Academy of Pharmacology Educators
A. Laurel Gorman, PhD, Nicole C. Kwiek, PhD, and Thomas C. Westfall, PhD (not pictured) were inducted into the Academy of Pharmacology Educators pictured with Carol Beck, PhD (center).
128
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
abuse of prescription medication, provides online
educational materials and hands-on learning at Ohio
State University’s Center of Science and Industry. She
has developed and taught MOOCs on pharmacology-
related topics through Coursera and iTunesU. Dr.
Kwiek is the lead administrator and teacher of Ohio
State University’s College of Pharmacy’s Pills, Potions,
and Poisons science enrichment program for high
school students.
Academy inductee Thomas C. Westfall, PhD is the
William Beaumont Professor and chair emeritus of
the Department of Pharmacology and Physiology at
St. Louis University School of Medicine. He received
his PhD from West Virginia University. Dr. Westfall
has been actively teaching pharmacology to medical
students and other health care profession students
for over 52 years as part of the faculty at universities
in Missouri, West Virginia, and Virginia. He has
been a PhD supervisor for 27 PhD students, a post-
doctoral mentor for 17 fellows, and has served on
over 100 prelim or thesis committees for PhD or MD/
PhD students. Dr. Westfall has been honored with
multiple teaching awards at St. Louis University. He
has authored or co-authored chapters in multiple
pharmacology textbooks, particularly chapters related
to autonomic pharmacology or neuropharmacology.
He has served on multiple ASPET committees and
in leadership roles, including chair of the Division for
Neuropharmacology (1991-1993). He was recognized
in 2015 for having been an ASPET member for 50
years. His successful research career consisted
of more than 28 NIH grants with more than $12
million in funding and a total of 103 years of support.
During his 34 years as chair of the Department of
Pharmacological and Physiological Science at St. Louis
University School of Medicine, Dr. Westfall hired and
mentored many junior faculty and was the principal
investigator on two NIH T32 training grants.
The Division for Pharmacology Education considers
it a privilege to add these three educator scholars to
the roster of the Academy of Pharmacology Educators
and is greatly appreciative of the many contributions
made by these three individuals.
Have You Joined a Division?Take full advantage of ASPET Membership by joining a Division!• Participate in creating scientific programming for the annual meeting
• Network with people in your field at mixers, Division programs, and on each Division’s
LinkedIn group
• Participate in running the Division and planning activities
• Receive special notices about events and activities of interest in your field
129
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
2016 Division MixersASPET members attended division-sponsored mixers at
EB2016 to network and socialize with friends and colleagues.
Many divisions held their award ceremonies and honored their
out-going leadership at the mixers.
View our photo collection from the 2016 annual meeting on Flickr: http://bit.ly/1rU8yeo
130
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Chapter News
The Great Lakes Chapter (GLC) of ASPET will
hold its 29th Annual Scientific Meeting on Thursday,
July 7, 2016 at the Feinberg School of Medicine,
Northwestern University, Hughes Auditorium, Lurie
Building, 303 E Superior Street, Chicago, IL.
Check the GLC website www.aspet.org/GLC for
more information about the 29th annual GLC meeting.
Abstracts are due by June 27th, 2016.
The meeting schedule includes:
• Poster Session (8:30AM – 10:30AM)
• Vendor Exhibit (8:30AM – 12:00PM)
• Young Investigator Symposium (10:45AM – 11:45AM)
• Lunch & Learn Career Workshop (12:00PM – 1:30PM)
• Symposium: Basic and Translational Advances
in Neurological Disease: From Signaling to
Therapeutics (1:30PM – 4:45PM)
Keynote: Dr. Alfred George (Northwestern
University): “Therapeutic Targeting of Ion
Channels in Genetic Epilepsy”
Speakers: Dr. Eric Karran (AbbVie), Dr. Robert
Vassar (Northwestern Univ.), Dr. Natalie
Tronson (Univ. of Michigan), Dr. Anthony
West (Rosalind Franklin Univ.)
• Poster Awards & Business Meeting
(4:45PM – 5:30PM)
Great Lakes Chapter29th Annual Meeting, July 7th, 2016
131
June 2016 • The Pharmacologist
VISIT THE ASPET CAREER CENTER TODAY!WWW.ASPET.ORG/CAREERCENTER/
9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3995Main Office: 301.634.7060 www.aspet.org
Jobseekers:
WHAT YOU NEED: ASPET’S CAREER CENTER HAS IT
The ASPET Career Center is the best resource for matching job seekers and employers in the pharmacology and related health science fi elds. Our vast range of resources and tools will help you look for jobs, fi nd great employees, and proactively manage your career goals.
No registration fee
Advanced search options
Sign up for automatic email notifi cations of new jobs that match your criteria
Free & confi dential résumé posting
Access to jobs posted on the National Healthcare Career Network (NHCN)
Career management resources including career tips, coaching, résumé writing, online profi le development, and much more
ASPET is committed to your success:
Employers: Searchable résumé database
Hassle-free posting; online account management tools
Reach ASPET’s Twitter followers (over 1,000), LinkedIn Members (over 2,000), and email subscribers (over 4,000)
Post to just ASPET or to entire NHCN network
Sign up for automatic email notifications of new résumés that match your criteria
Job activity tracking
ASPET Career Center Full Page Ad 2015 Updated.indd 1 2/26/2016 1:43:53 PM
132
The Pharmacologist • June 2016
Explore PharmacologyGraduate Studies in Pharmacology
Promote your graduate program in our 2016 edition of Explore Pharmacology. This publication gives college students an overview of the fundamentals and applications of pharmacology.
In addition, it describes the many employment opportunities that await graduate pharmacologists and outlines the academic path that they are advised to follow. There is no better place to advertise your graduate program!
Bene ts of Advertising with Explore Pharmacology:Distributed to 1,100+ undergraduate students and ASPET Undergraduate Student Members who have a direct interest in pharmacology and related graduate programs
Distributed at the Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students (ABRCMS), the Society for Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans in Science (SACNAS) meeting, and the Society for Neuroscience Annual Meeting where over 30,000 attendees are expected
Copies will be sent to each of the 21 universities that participate in ASPET’s Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) program
Advertising OpportunitiesAdvertise with a ¼ page, ½ page, or full page, 4-color display ad
Enhance your visibility by advertising on one of the covers (inside front, inside back, or back cover) with a full page, 4-color ad
Your ad will be highlighted on the ASPET Departments and Training Programs in Pharmacology webpage with a link to your website from September 1 - December 31, 2016
Act quickly, the Space and Materials deadline is Friday, July 15.
If you have questions or would like to see sample ads, contact ASPET’s advertising department:
Jason WellsAdvertising [email protected] 301.634.7117www.faseb.org/adnet/aspet
ExplorePharmacologyGraduate Studies in Pharmacology
American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeuticswww.aspet.org
Explore Pharmacology - June 2016.indd 1 5/18/2016 2:47:14 PM