2002年对饶毅教授诺奖预言的点评
作者前言
【朝花夕拾】几位《“诺光灯”下的科学史掠影》系列文章的热心读者最近问我,从2006年开始在网上BBS论坛对诺奖预测的兴趣是否受了饶毅教授的影响。其实我当年在霍普金斯医学院读博期间,就喜欢与其他研究生和博士后午饭聊天时预测诺奖,那时候还不知道饶教授。2002年饶教授发表了这篇著名的生理或医学奖预测文章,我读后感觉与他很有共鸣,于是决定逐渐把这个与他共同的业余爱好从线下转到线上。
饶教授这篇文章发表后第二天,他预测第15条中的Brenner、第7条中的Sulston,和第2条中的Horvitz,以秀丽线虫这个突破性模式生物为串联线索,分享了2002年度的生理或医学诺奖。我在2002年10月19日才读到饶教授的大作,在佩服他预测的准确度之余也想表达一些略微不同的科学史想法,于是就以群发邮件的形式与当时在美国学术界与工业界的“朋友圈”分享。这种即兴的点评并非专门的科普文章创作,当时为了节省时间,就用英语在饶教授文章的中文内容下点评批注。多年以后,这封电邮意外被我从雅虎邮箱里发掘了出来,与一些微信网友分享后,有人建议以公号文章形式发表。我在一番犹豫和征求了饶教授本人意见之后,决定通过《药时代》与科学史同好们分享。
二十一项值得获诺贝尔生理或医学奖的工作及科学家
作者:饶毅(写于2002年10月6日)
每年十月,是诺贝尔奖宣布获奖人的季节。2002年诺贝尔生理或医学奖在10月7日宣布。虽然评选委员会以外的人不能预计谁当年会得奖,一般来说,有相当一些人自己有判断,哪些人及其工作值得获奖。
就诺贝尔生理或医学奖来说,医学常有一些和临床有关的不容易预计,基础的多半大家公认,但是有时也出大家意外的,所以只可以列一个不全面的单子,这些人和工作在2002年10月6日前已经值得得奖,但是还没有得,由这个名单的长度也可以知道,因为这些突出工作的数量也就决定了他们不可能都得奖。后面几个工作,第19,20项可能因为时间过去而得不到,第21项很可能过一些时间再给(比如等十年也不算久)。如果这次名单里有以下科学家,也不会奇怪。
我还要说明一下,这样的预测不是特别难,能做这样预测的人成百上千,因为这是评价已经做出的研究。而预测未来研究领域和方向,则难。
(备注:以下内容中蓝色部分为徐博士的点评)
# These scientists have already been recognized by last year's Lasker Award, it's just a matter of time for them to receive the Nobel Prize.
# Prof. Rao is prescient to list Bob Horvitz as the only certain Nobel laureate in apoptosis research. Given the principle of recognizing only pioneers, I thought the 3 recipients might have been John Kerr, Andrew Wyllie, and Bob Horvitz (The senior author of the classic 1972 Kerr/Wyllie/Currie paper, Prof. Alastair Currie, passed away in 1994). The other names won't qualify as pioneers. Prof. Xiaodong Wang's discovery of cytochrome c and other key components of the apoptosome was the watershed event in the field, but it is very unlikely that there will be another prize for the biochemical mechanisms of apoptosis. At the end of the day, I think the Nobel Committee did a good job to circumvent the problem by awarding the study of C. elegans as a successful model organism. The Brenner-Sulston-Horvitz combination makes sense.
Elizabeth Blackburn(美国旧金山加州大学UCSF)和Carol Greider(美国霍普金斯大学Johns Hopkins),端粒子和端粒酶,Blackburn主要发现在UC Berkeley做,Greider那时是她的学生。另外有复旦的留学生余国良在Blackburn实验室做过一些早期工作。
# Discoveries made by Mark Ptashne and Bob Tjian might not reach the threshold of a Nobel prize. Prof. Rao’s prediction for Blackburn & Greider is very solid, but I’d like to add the name Jack Szostak as the co-discoverer of telomerase.
# It'll be very difficult for the field of ion channels to win a Nobel prize, just too controversial to narrow down to 3 pioneers.
# The chance is very slim for the RFLP method to win a Nobel, PCR markers and radiation hybrid technique had much greater impact. After the award for PCR in 1993, RFLP's time window was also closed.
# In the spirit of Alfred Nobel’s will, an engineering project like Human Genome Project (HGP) should never be awarded a prize unless there was a major scientific breakthrough or an important invention during the process.
# The GFP technology and in vivo calcium imaging have revolutionized biological research, but it may take the Nobel Committee quite some time to award these works.
# For tumor suppressor gene (TSG) research to be awarded, Knudson and Weinberg would be a good combination. Knudson was a pioneer to study retinoblastoma and Weinberg's lab cloned the Rb gene in 1986. W.H. Lee's paper was published in 1987. Bert Vogelstein may or may not be included, I'll say more likely not for two reasons: (1) Although Arnold Levine's original work on p53 had errors, he's still recognized the pioneer of the p53 discovery. Given the time precedence of Rb cloning, the Nobel Committee might pass over p53; (2) Vogelstein's lab has a Varmus-like co-PI Ken Kinzler, this might also complicate the picture of narrowing down to 3 laureates.
# Animal cloning is too early to be considered a Nobel prize.
# If I remember correctly, the discovery of MHC has already been awarded a Nobel. Why another one for the structure of MHC? Membrane proteins are difficult to crystalize, but pioneering structural determination of the photosynthetic center has already been awarded. So I don't think this area has a fair chance.
# No way for PKC and IP3 to be awarded after several prizes have already covered the field of signal transduction.
Aaron Ciechanover(以色列工学院Technion),Avram Hershko(以色列工学院Technion),Alexander Varshavsky(美国加州理工学院Caltech),发现蛋白质降解的生物化学机理。
# The field of ubiquitin and proteasome is very close to my heart! Based on my personal bias (my Ph.D. thesis was on small ubiquitin-like proteins), I wish a ubiquitin Nobel will happen soon, most likely as a Chemistry prize.
# Judah Folkman is a trail-blazing pioneer, he deserves to be the sole winner of a Medicine Nobel Prize!
# It is always regrettable to see Benzer passed over by the Nobel Committee, he did some elegant classical genetic experiments in bacteriophage. As the mentor of L.Y. Jan and Y.N. Jan (Prof. Rao's Ph.D. thesis advisor), Benzer also made significant contributions to behavioral neuroscience.
16Marc Raichle(美国圣路易斯华盛顿大学Washington University),用正电子扫描(PET scan)做活体人影像检测,可能和发明改进fMRI(“功能性核磁共振”,或称“功能性磁共振影像”)的人合得。他们的工作是生物医学影像的重要发展。
# MRI surely deserves a Nobel prize someday given the fact that CT was awarded more than 20 years ago. I’m not quite sure about PET scan, whose importance is clearly lower than CT or MRI.
# I don’t think the mere discovery of a new virus deserves a Nobel prize, plus Bob Gallo is a controversial figure. If someone find a way to cure AIDS or develop an HIV vaccine someday, then he or she should be awarded.
Tim Bliss(英国)和Terje Lomo(挪威),发现长期性增强作用(LTP),推动高等动物学习记忆研究。这项奖,受Eric Kandel近年刚因为研究低等动物(海兔)学习记忆得奖而可能推后。
# Paul Berg already shared the 1980 Chemistry Nobel for his work related to recombinant DNA. Although I think Boyer & Cohen deserve a separate Medicine prize, the writing is on the wall that the Nobel Committee already moved on from the topic of recombinant DNA.
# There was an intriguing story behind the Pert-Snyder controversy, interested observers might enjoy reading Robert Kanigel’s 1986 book “Apprentice to Genius” for more details. I have to say the chance for this area has already been passed due to many political reasons, we should simply forget it.
Apprentice to Genius(英文原版和中文译本的封面)
# RNAi is very hot right now, but antisense RNA showed conceptual similarity. It is very difficult to make a prediction in this area, we need the test of time. But if RNAi gets recognized by the Nobel Committee in the future, I think Ken Kemphues won’t share the prize as he missed the opportunity of pursuing why the “negative control” sense strand in Su Guo’s antisense experiment also showed knockdown activity.
小编导读
本文的中文版本准备中,将于近期发表。欢迎朋友们关注!多谢!
推荐阅读
从Aducanumab到GV-971,人类能跳出阿尔兹海默症这座“五指山”吗? 从横空出世到领跑眼科创新药,揭开欧康维视临床研发神秘面纱 ——访欧康维视首席医学官陈冬红博士 极目生物宣布引进FDA批准干眼治疗器械大中华区、韩国及东盟十国独家权益 里程碑!渤健/卫材阿尔兹海默症新药Aducanumab获FDA批准上市,十年磨一剑! 药时代直播间67期 | 对话强生创新:探索肿瘤免疫疗法趋势与合作 肿瘤治疗新纪元,还有哪些领域在蓄势待发? 六院士齐聚张江有话说|这里还有张文宏主任、朱剑虹会长、Christian Brechot主席、郝捷主任。。 豪森药业license-in新突破!抗真菌创新药BREXAFEMME ® (ibrexafungerp)已获美国FDA批准 中国好投资人 | 高瓴资本 科兴疫苗成为国内第二款获WHO批准紧急使用新冠疫苗,下一个花落谁家? 股价腰斩!400亿美元市场何时才能迎来首款治疗药物?NASH以及值得期待的下半年 中国好合伙人|同筑新药梦,共创大未来! First-in-Class!与药时代大咖共进午餐,您准备好了吗?