4.4 Review

Expanding the Number of 'Druggable' Targets: Non-Enzymes and Protein-Protein Interactions

期刊

CHEMICAL BIOLOGY & DRUG DESIGN
卷 81, 期 1, 页码 22-32

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cbdd.12066

关键词

biological screening; chemical biology; drug discovery; protein-protein interaction; virtual screening

资金

  1. NIH [NS059690, GM007767]
  2. NSF [MCB-0844512]
  3. American Foundation for Pharmaceutical Education
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [T32GM007767] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [R01NS059690] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Following sequencing and assembly of the human genome, the preferred methods for identification of new drug targets have changed dramatically. Modern tactics such as genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and deep sequencing are fundamentally different from the pharmacology-guided approaches used previously, in which knowledge of small molecule ligands acting at their cellular targets was the primary discovery engine. A consequence of the target-first, pharmacology-second strategy is that many predicted drug targets are non-enzymes, such as scaffolding, regulatory or structural proteins, and their activities are often dependent on proteinprotein interactions (PPIs). These types of targets create unique challenges to drug discovery efforts because enzymatic turnover cannot be used as a convenient surrogate for compound potency. Moreover, it is often challenging to predict how ligand binding to non-enzymes might affect changes in protein function and/or pathobiology. Thus, in the postgenomic era, targets might be strongly implicated by molecular biology-based methods, yet they often later earn the designation of undruggable. Can the scope of available targets be widened to include these promising, but challenging, non-enzymes? In this review, we discuss advances in high-throughput screening (HTS) technology and chemical library design that are emerging to deal with these challenges.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据