Navigating chemical space for biology and medicine

Nature

Volumn 432, Issue 7019, 2004, Pages 855-861

  Lipinski, Christopher ^a   Hopkins, Andrew ^b  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

^b PFIZER GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DRUG PRODUCTS; MOLECULES; SYNTHESIS (CHEMICAL);

BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS; CHEMICAL SPACE; CURSORY EXAMINATION;

MEDICINE;

ARSPHENAMINE; DRUG;

BIOLOGY;

BIOMEDICINE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DRUG ACTIVITY; DRUG FORMULARY; DRUG POTENCY; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG SYNTHESIS; DRUG TARGETING; HUMAN; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; MOLECULAR MECHANICS; NATURAL SCIENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REACTION OPTIMIZATION; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; TECHNIQUE;

BIOLOGY; CHEMISTRY; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; HUMANS; MEDICINE; PHARMACOLOGY; PROTEINS;

EID: 11144320699     PISSN: 00280836     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nature03193     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Sneader, W. Drug Prototypes and their Exploitation (Wiley, London, 1996).
2. Lipinski, C. A., Lombardo, F., Dominy, B. W. & Feeney, P. J. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 23, 3-25 (1997).
3. Schreiber, S. L. Chemical genetics resulting from a passion for synthetic organic chemistry. Bioorg. Med. Chew. 6, 1127-1152 (1998).
4. Austin, C.P., Brady, L. S., Insel, T. R. & Collins, F. S. NIH molecular libraries initiative Science 306, 1138-1139 (2004).
5. Bleicher, K. H., Bohm, H. J., Muller, K. & Alanine, A. I. Hit and lead generation: beyond high-throughput screening. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 369-378 (2003).
6. Bunin, B. A. & Ellman, J. A. A general and expedient method for the solid-phase synthesis of 1,4-benzodiazepine derivatives. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 114, 10997-10998 (1992).
7. Dolle, R. E. Comprehensive survey of combinatorial library synthesis: 2002. J. Comb. Chem. 5, 693-753 (2003).
8. Wermuth, C. G. Selective optimization of side activities: another way or drug discovery. J. Med. Chem. 47, 1303-1314 (2004).
9. Zambrowicz, B. P. & Sands, A. T. Knockouts model the 100 best-selling drugs - will they model the next 100? Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 38-51 (2003).
10. Crews, C. M. & Splittgerber, U. Chemical genetics: exploring and controlling cellular processes with chemical probes. Trends Biochem. Sci. 24, 317-320 (1999).
11. McGovern, S. L. & Shoichet, B. K. Kinase inhibitors: not just for kinases anymore. J. Med. Chem. 46, 1478-1483 (2003).
12. Krejsa, C. M. et al. Predicting ADME properties and side effects: the BioPrint approach. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 6, 470-480 (2003).
13. Wu, X., Glickman, J. F., Bowen, B. R. & Sills, M. A. Comparison of assay technologies for a nuclear receptor assay screen reveals differences in the sets of identified functional antagonists. J. Biomol. Screen. 8, 381-392 (2003).
14. Sills, M. A. et al. Comparison of assay technologies for a tyrosine kinase assay generates defferent results in high throughput screening. J. Biomol. Screen. 7, 191-214. (2002).
15. Harper, G., Bradshaw, J., Gittins, J. C., Green, D. V. & Leach, A. R. Prediction of biological activity for high-throughput screening using binary kernel discrimination. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 41, 1295-1300 (2001).
16. Engels, M. F. M., Wouters, L., Verbeeck, R. & Vanhoof, G. Outlier mining in high throughput screening experiments. J. Biomol. Screen, 7, 341-351 (2002).
17. Lipinski, C. A. in Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry (eds van de Waterbeemd, H. et al.) 18, Ch. 9 215-231 (2003).
18. Rishton, G. M. Reactive compounds and in vitro false positives in HTS. Drug Discov. Today 2, 382-384 (1997).
19. Rishton, G. M. Nonleadlikeness and leadlikeness in biochemical screening. Drug Discov. Today 8, 86-96 (2003).
20. Swinney, D. C. Biochemical mechanism of drug action: what does it take for success? Nature Rev. Drug Dicov. 3, 801-808 (2004).
21. Baurin, N. et al. Drug-like annotation and duplicate analysis of a 23-supplier chemical database totalling 2.7 million compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44, 643-651 (2004).
22. Andrews, P. R., Craik, D. J. & Martin, J. L. Functional group contributions to drug-receptor interactions. J. Med. Chem. 27, 1648-1657 (1984).
23. Hann, M. M., Leach, A. R. & Harper, G. Molecular complexity and its impact on the probability of finding leads for drug discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 41, 856-864 (2001).
24. Williams, M. A return to the fundamentals of drug discovery. Curr. Opin. Investig. Drugs 5, 29-33 (2004).
25. Horrobin, D. F. Modern biomedical research: an internally self-consistent universe with little contact with medical reality. Nature Rev. Drug. Discov. 2, 151-154 (2003).
26. Morphy, R., Kay, C. & Rankovic, Z. From magic bullets to designed multiple ligands. Drug Discov. Today 9, 641-651 (2004).
27. Lipper, R. A. How can we optimize selection of drug development candidates from many compounds at the discovery stage? Mod. Drug Discov. 2, 55-60 (1999).
28. Van Gestel, S. & Schuermans, V. Thirty-three years of drug discovery and research with Dr. Paul Janssen, Drug Dev. Res. 8, 1-13 (1986).
29. Raju, T. N. The Nobel chronicles. Lancet 355, 1022 (2000).
30. Hopkins, A. L. & Groom, C. R. The druggable genome. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 727-730 (2002).
31. Hopkins, A. L. & Groom, C. R. Target analysis: a priori assessment of druggability. Ernst Schering Res. Found. Workshop 42, 11-17 (2003).
32. Arkin, M. R. & Wells, J. A. Small-molecule inhibitors of protein-protein interactions: progressing towards the dream. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 301-317 (2004).
33. Teague, S. J. Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 527-541 (2003).
34. Rader, C. Antibody libraries in drug and target discovery. Drug Discov. Today 6, 36-43 (2001).
35. Graddis, T. J. et al. Designing proteins that work using recombinant technologies. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 3, 285-297 (2002).
36. Zambrowicz, B. P. & Sands, A. T. Modeling drug action in the mouse with knockouts and RNA interference. Drug Discov. Today: TARGETS 3, 198-207.
37. Shokat, K. & Velleca, M. Novel chemical genetic approaches to the discovery of signal transduction inhibitors.. Drug Discov. Today 7, 872-879 (2002).
38. Hannon, G. J. & Rossi, J. J. Unlocking the potential of the human genome with RNA interference. Nature 431, 371-378 (2004).
39. Lobato, M. N. & Rabbitts, T. H. Intracellular antibodies as specific reagents for functional ablation: future therapeutic molecules. Curr. Mol. Med. 4, 519-528 (2004).
40. Rees, D. C., Congreve, M., Murray, C. W. & Carr, R. Fragment-based lead discovery. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 660-672 (2004).
41. Shuker, S. B., Hajduk, P. J., Meadows, R. P. & Fesik, S. W. Discovering high-affinity ligands for proteins: SAR by NMR. Science 274, 1531-1534 (1996).
42. Swayze, E. E. et al. SAR by MS: a ligand based technique for drug lead discovery against structured RNA targets. J. Med. Chem. 45, 3816-3819 (2002).
43. Nienaber, V. L. et al. Discovering novel ligands for macromolecules using X-ray crystallographic screening. Nature Biotechhol. 18, 1105-1108 (2000).
44. Lesuisse, D. et al. SAR and X-ray. A new approach combining fragment-based screening and rational drug design: application to the discovery of nanomolar inhibitors of Src SH2. J. Med. Chem. 45, 2379-2387 (2002).
45. Blundell, T. L., Jhoti, H. & Abell, C. High-throughput crystallography for lead discovery in drug design. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 45-54 (2002).
46. Kolb, H. C. & Sharpless, K. B. The growing impact of click chemistry on drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 8, 1128-1137 (2003).
47. Kolb, H. C., Finn, M. G. & Sharpless, K. B. Click chemistry: diverse chemical function from a few good reactions. Angew. Chem. Int. Edn Engl. 40(11), 2004-2021 (2001).
48. Erlanson, D. A. et al. Site-directedligand discovery. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 9367-9372 (2000).
49. Erlanson, D. A., Wells, J. A. & Braisted, A. C. Tethering: fragment-based drug discovery. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 33, 199-223 (2004).
50. Weininger, D. in Encyclopedia of Computational Chemistry (eds Von Ragué Schleyer, P. et al.) 425-530 (Wiley, New York, 1998).
51. Oprea, T. I. & Gottfries, J. Chemography: the art of navigating in chemical space. J. Comb. Chem. 3, 157-166 (2001).
52. Oprea, T. I. Chemical space navigation in lead discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 6, 384-389 (2002).
53. Vieth, M. et al. Characteristic physical properties and structural fragments of marketed oral drugs. J. Med. Chem. 47, 224-232 (2004).
54. Ajay, A., Walters, W. P. & Murcko, M. A. Can we learn to distinguish between 'drug-like' and 'nondrug-like' molecules? J. Med. Chem. 41, 3314-3324 (1998).
55. Wang, J. & Ramnarayan, K. Towards designing drug-like libraries: a novel computational approach for prediction of drug feasibility of compounds. J. Comb. Chem. 1, 524-533 (1999).
56. Walters, W. P., Ajay & Murcko, M. A. Recognizing molecules with drug-like properties. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 3, 384-387 (1999).
57. Lipinski, C. A. Drug-like properties and the causes of poor solubility and poor permeability. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 44, 3-25 (2000).
58. Podlogar, B. L., Muegge, I. & Brice, L. J. Computational methods to estimate drug development parameters. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 4, 102-109 (2001).
59. Muegge, I., Heald, S. L. & Brittelli, D. Simple selection criteria for drug-like chemical matter. J. Med. Chem. 44, 1841-1846 (2001).
60. Veber, D. F. et al. Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates. J. Med. Chem. 45, 2615-2623 (2002).
61. Proudfoot, J. R. Drugs, leads, and drug-likeness: an analysis of some recently launched drugs. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 12, 1647-1650 (2002).
62. Walters, W. P. & Murcko, M. A. Prediction of 'drug-likeness'. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 54, 255-271 (2002).
63. Egan, W. J., Walters, W. P. & Murcko, M. A. Guiding molecules towards drug-likeness. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 5, 540-549 (2002).
64. Muegge, I. Selection criteria for drug-like compounds. Med. Res. Rev. 23, 302-321 (2003).
65. Lajiness, M. S., Vieth, M. & Erkkson, J. Molecular properties that influence oral drug-like behavior. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 7, 470-477 (2004).
66. Horn, J. R. & Shoichet, B. K. Allosteric inhibition through core disruption. J. Mol. Biol. 336, 1283-1291 (2004).