|
Our coverage of the British Pharmaceutical Conference 2004 continues.
Harriet Adcock reports sessions on the changing face
of science and practice (p525), as well as genomics (p531) and stem cell technologies
(p530). Dawn Connelly covers the address given by Sir Michael Rawlins
(p529) and reports on point-of-care testing (p533). Rachel
Graham considers
automated dispensing (534) and tackling infection (p535). Christine
Clark reports sessions on new medicines (p528 and p532). Photographs
from the conference start on p526
Opinion is divided as to whether pharmaceutical science is relevant
to practice, Sandy Florence, dean of the School of Pharmacy, University
of London, told BPC delegates. “There is a dichotomy of opinion
and we as pharmaceutical scientists need to work very hard in explaining
what it is we do,” he said.
Professor Florence was emphatic that many of the increasingly difficult
problems encountered in pharmacy practice could be resolved by the application
of pharmaceutical science, which he described as a unique subject.
Pharmaceutical sciences have an impact on all areas of drug delivery — from
administration site to target. “It is a complex journey. From the
gross delivery system to the minutiae of the receptor. This is at the
very heart of patient care,” he said.
Professor Florence urged pharmacists to take pride in the innovations
developed by researchers working within schools of pharmacy.
“This pride in our sciences and scientists should drive our profession
forward,” he said, adding: “A profession that does not recognise
the worth of its scientists or science and does not use and expand its
knowledge of science ... will become a derivative profession always
using someone else’s knowledge.”
He also stressed the importance of pharmacy’s role in the development
of new drug delivery technologies, warning that if pharmacists did not
take an interest, others would. There was a need to take forward novel
procedures, drugs and delivery systems, an area sometimes viewed as passé by
pharmacy undergraduates. “Chemical engineers are rushing to fill
this void,” he warned.
Professor Florence was worried that if pharmacists were no longer concerned
about medicinal products they would not have the knowledge to make medicines
safe.
“Our unique role is that we understand both the product and the patient,
especially that increasingly complex relationship between the two,” he
continued.
Looking to the future, Professor Florence said that new approaches were
needed in science and practice because of the variability of human responses
to medicines, the unpredictability of adverse drug reactions and the
slow progress with gene therapy.
“Individualisation of medicines must happen. In the post genomic era we
must tailor dosages of drugs more precisely to patient profiles,” he
said.
However, he pointed out that scientists often believed that taking theory
into practice was easy. The problems associated with delivering gene
therapy showed this was not the case and identified a role for pharmaceutical
scientists. “If we do not understand it or do not tackle it within
the pharmaceutical sciences we will never get gene therapy non-viral
vectors,” he said.
Another role for pharmacists was to come up with suitable dosage forms
required for unusual situations. And an understanding of the pharmaceutical
sciences gave them the confidence to tackle such situations.
“There is a generation of practising pharmacists who have become
scared of this experimental approach,” he said.
This worried Professor Florence, who urged delegates to embrace the pharmaceutical
sciences. “We need to apply basic sciences to clinical problems.
Not only to drugs but to formulations. Forgetting about formulation is
a real drag on our ability to intervene.” |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal