They saw Shkreli hike prices 100x and decided that was the business model for them. Same thing has happened with rabies.
My understanding is that FDA trials (specifically phase 2 + 3) are the death valley for most drugs and finding a biomarker is something mostly done through a mix of gene bank scraping + looking at old biomarker databanks. The majority of the cost and time is in failed drugs that do not pass FDA trials (which average 6-7 years end-to-end).
Note: I am asking this in earnest. I am not trying to ask a leading question and saying it is not important at all.
It's nice to (as the blog post suggests) give the opportunity to non medical experts, say in this case a snake/venom research center, to pursue a problem and produce some realistic candidates that they could pay to test. I do think it's good to democratize what parts of the process can be, but it's more of a resource prioritization problem than a molecular design one.
Let alone the fact this doesn’t even appear to be peer reviewed either from Anthropic.
I wouldn't trust you with a gun of mine... I don't know you.
In practical terms this is like Claude designing you a new home. Cool, you now have blueprints for a new home. You can print it out and hang it on the wall of your studio apartment.
I got Opus5 to write me a enzyme design pipeline on AWS last month using available tools and databases. It works fine. It's not as handsoff as you might think when you start looking at more complex proteins with multiple binding pockets and sequential catalytic process within multimeric structures. The bottleneck is still actually testing the candidates out in the lab.
Much of whether or not a candidate drug will succeed was determined all the way back in the design/discovery stage. If we can design better drugs, then we would enjoy a higher probability of success in the later clinical trials.
The single biggest improvement to pharma drug development would be from increasing the probability of success in clinical trials.
MattGrommes•1h ago
giancarlostoro•1h ago
enraged_camel•40m ago
Sorry, what? OpenAI is "ahead" in math. Anthropic is "ahead" in life sciences, and even have their own wet lab.
giancarlostoro•17m ago
If I were at Anthropic, I'd be making sure the higher ups highlight discoveries made using the models they make, because OpenAI is definitely highlighting those.