Jump to content

Talk:Radafaxine

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.9.32.49 (talk) at 01:51, 9 February 2007 (→‎Linked from statement in bupropion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Much of this comes from information in:

http://213.219.8.102/pdfs/gsk/cns_seminar/353162.pdf

Forgive me for my ignorance

I didn't realize that this subject could be considered to be trivial. I guess that I'll try to sell reasons for keeping it around, though:

1 - While I don't really know (explicitly) what "Crystal Balling" is, I think that it's fair to say that this is a very real compound that is being really tested on real people and has produced real data (in clinical studies). There's no speculation about this...see the link (which contains a powerpoint presentation from a researcher at GSK). If this drug will see the light of day is probably debate - worthy, but the facts presented (so far) are hardly "speculative".

2 - Wellbutrin (bupropion) is one of the best selling AD drugs in history. It seems to me that any drug in the pipeline that is a direct follow - up to bupropion (from a scientific and marketing standpoint) is (at least) noteworthy.

3 - For those who like to invest their money in stocks, information about drugs in a specific manufacturer's pipeline (as well as potential efficacy...or lack thereof, approval status, indications, current research, etc) should have *some* value.

4 - There is a fair amount of general human interest in antidepressant drugs (I believe) generally. The "potential next big thing" in this department should at least register on some radar screens.

5 - A general web search about this compound yields a large volume of information (a fair amount of which is not directly commercial).

6 - There is a lot of potential here for material on strategies that Big Pharma uses to perpetuate patent protection. In this case, one of the metabolites of a generic drug (bupropion) is being isolated and there is attempt to protect and market it as something "new". The value and justification of such a strategy seems worthy of presentation and this compound could be used to illustrate the point.


Still, I concede that I don't yet know enough about "what should be allowed" as an article to be able to completely defend inclusion of this subject as a wikipedia article.

I'll let the "content authority" dictate that one, I guess.... who is that again? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.32.49 (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

In terms of notability....

Description:

" a topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself."

Let's see:

Multiple - Well, at least three sources so far

Non - Trivial - At least two independent scientific studies... probably not in someone's basement.

Reliable - Probably not in dispute (check references)

Independent - Two of the three (so far) seem to be... one is clearly from GSK but hardly seems to be "self - serving" (more of a presentation of current clinical trials).


I'll wait for replies on this, but (obviously) I think that the "deletion sentence" isn't warranted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.32.49 (talk) 01:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Linked from statement in bupropion

An addition to the bupropion article which describes Radafaxine (with a reference) as a metabolite of bupropion has been made. We'll see if it stands the test of time, as well! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.32.49 (talk) 01:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]