From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Novartis Institute for Tropical Disease (NITD) is a Singapore-based tropical disease research institute created through a public-private partnership between Novartis and the Singapore Economic Development Board. Research at NITD focuses primarily on developing novel small molecule therapies for tropical infectious diseases that are endemic to the developing world, particulary dengue fever, malaria and tuberculosis.
History and mission
NITD states its goals are “to discover novel treatments and prevention methods for major tropical diseases.” Their website states they hope to have at least two drug candidates going through clinical trials in patients by the year 2012.
Research is currently focused on three main diseases:
NITD’s research model relies on global partnership with other research institutes. In 2008, NITD announced a 5-year collaborative research effort would be conducted in cooperation with the TB Alliance to develop new medicines for tuberculosis, including drug resistant tuberculosis.
In addition to research, NITD is engaged in educational activities. It runs a research-based Master of Science program in fields related to infectious diseases in cooperation with National University of Singapore, University of Basel and Swiss Tropical Institute.
- “About NITD“. Novartis AG (2008).
- “Our mission“. Novartis AG (2008).
- “Commitment to Patients Earns Novartis’ Dr. Daniel Vasella B’nai B’rith International’s Highest Award“. PharmaLive.
- “Novartis symposium in Mozambique tackles emerging tuberculosis challenges” (Novartis media release)
- “Master of Science in infectious diseases, vaccinology and drug discovery“. Novartis AG (2008).
I guess this means I’m officially a sell-out and a drone of Big Pharma™?
I came across the NITD while doing background research on Novartis activities in Asia-Pacific. As long as there is sufficient oversight, public-private partnerships like this can mean more science gets done, and removes competition between (what I think should be) two totally different models of innovation.
This article was pretty easy to piece together out of press releases and the institute’s own website. If I do say myself, it is generally neutral and sedate in its tone. It possibly could do with additional third party coverage, but I suspect any of that (if any) will be Singapore print media, which I don’t exactly have access to.