{"title":"Discontinued therapies for sickle cell disease: status and future directions.","authors":"Akshay Sharma, Shruthi Suryaprakash, Liza-Marie Johnson, Yoram Unguru","doi":"10.1080/13543784.2026.2663116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Over the past decade, the therapeutic landscape for sickle cell disease (SCD) has expanded beyond hydroxyurea to targeted small molecules, monoclonal antibodies, and transformative cellular and gene therapies. However, not every investigational approach survives the rigor of randomized trials, post-marketing surveillance, and commercial realities. High-profile discontinuations and trial failures have important implications for a disease community with longstanding unmet needs and a historical mistrust of biomedical research.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>This review analyzes the proximate causes of discontinuation of SCD therapies, highlighting recurrent themes such as overreliance on surrogate endpoints, trial design limitations, post-marketing safety surveillance gaps, enrollment challenges, and corporate reprioritization, and draws lessons for future drug development. We place the most consequential cases in context and discuss how next-generation agents, trial design innovations, biomarker-based strategies, and equitable deployment might reduce the likelihood and impact of future discontinuations. Finally, we propose pragmatic recommendations to maximize patient benefit while minimizing avoidable harms.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Recent advances in sickle cell therapies bring real promise alongside setbacks. Failures are part of progress, but better trial design, transparency, patient partnership, and shared data can reduce harm, strengthen trust, and ensure innovation translates into meaningful, durable patient benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":12313,"journal":{"name":"Expert opinion on investigational drugs","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert opinion on investigational drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13543784.2026.2663116","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Over the past decade, the therapeutic landscape for sickle cell disease (SCD) has expanded beyond hydroxyurea to targeted small molecules, monoclonal antibodies, and transformative cellular and gene therapies. However, not every investigational approach survives the rigor of randomized trials, post-marketing surveillance, and commercial realities. High-profile discontinuations and trial failures have important implications for a disease community with longstanding unmet needs and a historical mistrust of biomedical research.
Areas covered: This review analyzes the proximate causes of discontinuation of SCD therapies, highlighting recurrent themes such as overreliance on surrogate endpoints, trial design limitations, post-marketing safety surveillance gaps, enrollment challenges, and corporate reprioritization, and draws lessons for future drug development. We place the most consequential cases in context and discuss how next-generation agents, trial design innovations, biomarker-based strategies, and equitable deployment might reduce the likelihood and impact of future discontinuations. Finally, we propose pragmatic recommendations to maximize patient benefit while minimizing avoidable harms.
Expert opinion: Recent advances in sickle cell therapies bring real promise alongside setbacks. Failures are part of progress, but better trial design, transparency, patient partnership, and shared data can reduce harm, strengthen trust, and ensure innovation translates into meaningful, durable patient benefit.
期刊介绍:
Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs (ISSN 1354-3784 [print], 1744-7658 [electronic]) is a MEDLINE-indexed, peer-reviewed, international journal publishing review articles and original papers on drugs in preclinical and early stage clinical development, providing expert opinion on the scope for future development.
The Editors welcome:
Reviews covering preclinical through to Phase II data on drugs or drug classes for specific indications, and their potential impact on future treatment strategies
Drug Evaluations reviewing the clinical and pharmacological data on a particular drug
Original Research papers reporting the results of clinical investigations on agents that are in Phase I and II clinical trials
The audience consists of scientists, managers and decision-makers in the pharmaceutical industry, and others closely involved in R&D.