Key aspects of the Novartis compound collection enhancement project for the compilation of a comprehensive chemogenomics drug discovery screening collection

Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 397-411

  Jacoby, Edgar ^a   Schuffenhauer, Ansgar ^a   Popov, Maxim ^a   Azzaoui, Kamal ^a   Havill, Benjamin ^a   Schopfer, Ulrich ^a   Engeloch, Caroline ^a   Stanek, Jaroslav ^a   Acklin, Pierre ^a   Rigollier, Pascal ^a   Stoll, Friederike ^a   Koch, Guido ^a   Meier, Peter ^a   Orain, David ^a   Giger, Rudolph ^a   Hinrichs, Jürgen ^a   Malagu, Karine ^a   Zimmermann, Jürg ^a   Roth, Hans Joerg ^a  

^a NOVARTIS PHARMA AG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELL NUCLEUS RECEPTOR; DIMETHYL SULFOXIDE; DRUG; ENZYME; G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR; ION CHANNEL; OXYGEN; PHOSPHOTRANSFERASE; PROTEINASE; WATER;

BIOINFORMATICS; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; CHEMICAL INTERACTION; CHEMICAL REACTION; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; COMBINATORIAL CHEMISTRY; COMBINATORIAL LIBRARY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER MODEL; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG IDENTIFICATION; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG SOLUBILITY; DRUG STABILITY; DRUG STORAGE; DRUG SYNTHESIS; DRUG TARGETING; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MOLECULAR MODEL; PHARMACOGENOMICS; PHARMACOPHORE; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; STEREOCHEMISTRY; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ANIMALS; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMBINATORIAL CHEMISTRY TECHNIQUES; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; GENOMICS; HUMANS; PEPTIDE LIBRARY;

EID: 19944422452     PISSN: 15680266     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/1568026053828376     Document Type: Review

References (137)

1. Milne, G.M. Jr. Pharmaceutical Productivity - The Imperatives for New Paradigms. Ann. Rep. Med. Chem. 2003, 38, 383-396.
2. Wess, G. How to Escape the Bottleneck of Medicinal Chemistry. Drug Discov. Today 2002, 4, 533-535.
3. Bleicher, K.H.; Böhm, H.J.; Müller, K.; Alanine, A.I. Hit and Lead Generation: Beyond High-throughput Screening. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 369-378.
4. Murcko, M.; Caron, P. Transforming the Genome to Drug Discovery. Drug Discov. Today 2002, 7, 583-584.
5. Walters, W.P.; Namchuk, M. Designing Screens: How to Make your Hits a Hit. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 259-266.
6. Kubinyi, H. Drug Research: Myths, Hype and Reality. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 8, 665-668.
7. Cheng, X.; Hochlowski, J.; Tang, H.; Hepp, D.; Beckner, C.; Kantor, S.; Schmitt, R. Studies on Repository Compound Stability in DMSO Under Various Conditions. J. Biomol. Screen. 2003, 8, 292-304.
8. Lipinski, C.A. Chris Lipinski Discusses Life and Chemistry after the Rule of Five. Drug Discov. Today 2003, 8, 12-16.
9. Kozikowski, B.A.; Burt, T.M.; Tirey, D.A.; Williams, L.E.; Kuzmak, B.R.; Stanton, D.T.; Morand, K.L.; Nelson, S.L. The Effect of Freeze/thaw Cycles on the Stability of Compounds in DMSO. J. Biomol. Screen. 2003, 8, 210-215.
10. Oprea, T.I; Matter, H. Integrating Virtual Screening in Lead Discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 349-358.
11. Kozikowski, B.A.; Burt, T.M.; Tirey, D.A.; Williams, L.E.; Kuzmak, B.R.; Stanton, D.T.; Morand, K.L.; Nelson, S.L. The Effect of Room-temperature Storage on the Stability of Compounds in DMSO. J. Biomol. Screen. 2003, 8, 205-209.
12. Schuffenhauer, A.; Popov, M.; Schopfer, U.; Acklin, P.; Stanek, J.; Jacoby, E. Molecular Diversity Management Strategies for Building Diverse and Focused Lead Discovery Compound Screening Collections. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2004, 7, 771-782.
13. Martin, Y.C. Diverse Viewpoints on Computational Aspects of Molecular Diversity. J. Comb. Chem. 2001, 3, 231-250.
14. Hann, M.H.; Oprea, T.I. Pursuing the Leadlikeness Concept in Pharmaceutical Research. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 255-263.
15. Proudfoot, JR. Drugs, Leads, and Drug-likeness: An Analysis of Some Recently Launched Drugs. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2002, 12, 1647-1650.
16. Charifson, P.S.; Walters, W.P. Filtering Databases and Chemical Libraries. J. Comput.-Aid Mol. Design 2002, 16, 311-323.
17. Rishton, G.M. Non-leadlikeness and Leadlikeness in Biochemical Screening. Drug Discovery Today 2002, 8, 86-96.
18. Schuffenhauer, A.; Floersheim, P.; Acklin, P.; Jacoby, E. Similarity Metrics for Ligands Reflecting the Similarity of the Target Proteins. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 391-405.
19. Clark, R.D. OptiSim: An Extended Dissimilarity Selection Method for Finding Diverse Representative Subsets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1997, 37, 1181-1188.
20. Downs, G.M.; Barnard J.M. Clustering Methods and their Use in Computational Chemistry. Rev. Comput. Chem. 2002, 18, 1-40.
21. http://www.bci.uk.com.
22. Ott, T.; Kern, A.; Schuffenhauer, A.; Popov, M.; Acklin, P.; Jacoby, E.; Stoop, R. Sequential Superparamagnetic Clustering for Unbiased Classification of High-dimensional Chemical Data. J. Chem. Inf. Comp. Sci. 2004, 44, 1358-1364.
23. Sauer, W.H.B.; Schwarz, M.K. Molecular Shape Diversity of Combinatorial Libraries: A Prerequisite for Broad Bioactivity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 987-1003.
24. Watson, P.; Willett, P.; Gillet, V.; Verdonk, M.L. Calculating the Knowledge-based Similarity of Functional Groups using Crystallographic Data. J. Comput.-Aid. Mol. Design, 2001, 15, 835-857.
25. Müller, G. Medicinal Chemistry of Target Family-directed Masterkeys. Drug Discov. Today 2003, 8, 681-691.
26. Müller, G. Target Family-directed Masterkeys in Chemogenomics. In:'Chemogenomics in Drug Discovery - A Medicinal Chemistry Perspective' ( Volume 22 of Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry, Eds. Mannhold, R.; Kubinyi, H.; Folkers, G.), Eds. Kubinyi, H; Müller, G. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2004, pp. 7-42.
27. Baurin, N.; Baker, R.; Richardson, C.; Chen, I.; Foloppe, N.; Potter, A.; Jordan, A.; Roughley, S.; Parratt, M.; Greaney, P.; Morley, D.; Hubbard, R.E. Drug-like Annotation and Duplicate Analysis of a 23-Supplier Chemical Database Totalling 2.7 Million Compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 643-651.
28. www.chemnavigator.com.
29. Andrews, K.M.; Cramer, R.D. Toward General Methods of Targeted Library Design: Topomer Shape Similarity Searching with Diverse Structures as Queries. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 1723-1740.
30. Rarey, M.; Stahl, M. Similarity Searching in Large Combinatorial Chemistry Spaces. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 497-520.
31. Sheridan, R.P.; Kearsley, S.K. Why do we Need so Many Chemical Similarity Search Methods? Drug Discov. Today 2002, 4, 903-911.
32. Goodnow, R.A. Jr.; Guba, W.; Haapl, W. Library Design Practices for Success in Lead Generation with Small Molecule Libraries. Comb. Chem. High Throughput. Screen. 2003, 6, 649-660.
33. Matter, H.; Baringhaus, K.-H.; Naumann, T.; Klabunde, T.; Pirard, B. Computational Approaches Towards the Rational Design of Drug-like Compound Libraries. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2001, 4, 453-475.
34. Bajorath, J. Integration of Virtual and High-throughput Screening. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2002, 1, 882-894.
35. Rose, S.; Stevens, A. Computational Design Strategies for Combinatorial Libraries. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2003, 7, 331-339.
36. Blake, J.F. Integrating Cheminformatics Analysis in Combinatorial Chemistry. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 407-411.
37. 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. 1997, 23, 3-25.
38. Mühlbacher, J.; Ertl, P.; Selzer, P.; Müller, L.; Glowienke, S.; Schuffenhauer, A. Toxizitätsvohersage im Intranet. Nachr. Chem. 2004, 52, 162-164.
39. Di, L; Kerns, E. Profiling Drug-like Properties in Discovery Research. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2003, 7, 402-408.
40. Deprez-Poulain, R.; Deprez, B. Facts, Figures and Trends in Lead Generation. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2004, 4, 569-580.
41. Koch,M.A.; Breinbauer. R.; Waldmann, H. Protein Structure Similarity as Guiding Principle for Combinatorial Library Design. Biol Chem. 2003, 384, 1265-1272.
42. Kick, E.K.; Roe, D.C.; Skillman, A.G.; Liu, G.; Ewing, T.J.; Sun, Y.; Kuntz, I.D.; Ellman, J.A. Structure-Based Design and Combinatorial Chemistry Yield Low Nanomolar Inhibitors of Cathepsin D. Chem. Biol. 1997, 4, 297-307.
43. Pierce, A.C.; Rao, G.; Bemis, G.W. BREED: Generating Novel Inhibitors Through Hybridization of Known Ligands. Application to CDK2, p38, and HIV Protease. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 2768-2775.
44. Abagyan, R; Totrov, M. High-throughput Docking for Lead Generation. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2001, 5, 375-382.
45. Schneider, G.; Böhm, H.J. Virtual Screening and Fast Automated Docking Methods. Drug Discov. Today 2002, 7, 64-70.
46. Brooijmans, N.; Kuntz, I.D. Molecular Recognition and Docking Algorithms. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 2003, 32, 335-373.
47. Böhm, H.-J., Stahl, M. The Use of Scoring Functions in Drug Discovery Applications. Rev. Comput. Chem. 2002, 18, 41-87.
48. Teague, S.J. Implications of Protein Flexibility for Drug Discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 527-540.
49. Schneider, G.; Lee, M.L.; Stahl, M.; Schneider, P. De Novo Design of Molecular Architectures by Evolutionary Assembly of Drug-derived Building Blocks. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2000, 14, 487-494.
50. Lloyd, D.G.; Buenemann, C.L.; Todorov, N.P.; Manallack, D.T.; Dean, P.M. Scaffold Hopping in De Novo Design. Ligand Generation in the Absence of Receptor Information. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 493-496.
51. Balakin, K.V.; Tkachenko, E.S; Lang, S.A; Okun, I.; Ivashchenko A.A.; Savchuk N.P. Property Based Design of GPCR-targeted Libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 1332-1342.
52. Van Drie, J.H. Pharmacophore Discovery-lessons Learned. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2003, 9, 1649-1664.
53. Mestres, J. Computational Chemogenomics Approaches to Systematic Knowledge-based Drug Discovery. Curr. Opin. Drug Discovery Dev. 2004, 7, 304-314.
54. Baringhaus, K.-H.; Klabunde, T.; Matter, H.; Nauman, T.; Pirard, B. Knowledge-based Lead Finding by Matching Chemical and Biological Space. In: 'Molecular Informatics: Confronting Complexity' Proceedings of the Beilstein-Institut Workshop, May 13th-16th, 2002, Bozen, Italy. Eds. Hicks, M.G.; Kettner, C. 2003, http://www.beilstein-institut.de/bozen2002/proceedings.
55. Caron, P.R.; Mullican, M.D.; Mashal, R.D.; Wilson, K.P.; Su, M.S.; Murcko, M.A. Chemogenomic Approaches to Drug Discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2001, 5, 464-470.
56. Vieth, M.; Higgs, R.E.; Robertson, D.H.; Shapiro, M., Gragg, E.A. Hemmerle, H. Kinomics-structural Biology and Chemogenomics of Kinase Inhibitors and Targets. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2004, 1697, 243-257.
57. ter Haar, E.; Walters, W.P.; Pazhanisamy, S.; Taslimi, P.; Pierce, A.C.; Bemis, G.W.; Salituro, F.G.; Harbeson, S.L. Kinase Chemogenomics: Targeting the Human Kinome for Target Validation and Drug Discovery. Mini. Rev. Med. Chem. 2004, 4, 235-253.
58. Jacoby, E. A Novel Chemogenomics Knowledge-based Ligand Design Strategy - Application to G protein-coupled Receptors. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 2001, 20, 115-123.
59. Klabunde, T.; Hessler, G. Drug Design Strategies for Targeting G-protein Coupled Receptors. ChemBioChem 2002, 3, 928-944.
60. Crossley, R. The Design of Screening Libraries Targeted at G-protein Coupled Receptors. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2004, 4, 581-588.
61. Jimonet, P.; Jäger, R. Strategies for Designing GPCR-focused Libraries and Screening Sets. Curr. Opin. Drug Discovery Dev. 2004, 7, 325-333.
62. Bleicher, K.H.; Green, L.G.; Martin, R.E.; Rogers-Evans, M. Ligand Identification for G-protein-coupled Receptors: A Lead Generation Perspective. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 287-296.
63. Teague, S.J.; Davis, A.M.; Leeson, P.D.; Oprea, T. The Design of Leadlike Combinatorial Libraries. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1999, 38, 3743-3748.
64. Brown, R.D.; Hassan, M.; Waldman, M. Combinatorial Library Design for Diversity, Cost efficiency, and Drug-like character. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2000, 18, 427-437.
65. Jamois, E. A.; Hassan, M.; Waldman, M. Evaluation of Reagent-based and Product-based Strategies in the Design of Combinatorial Library Subsets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 63-70.
66. Wright, T.; Gillet, V.J.; Green, D.V.S.; Pickett, S.D. Optimizing the Size and Configuration of Combinatorial Libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 381-390.
67. Spencer, R.W. High-throughput Screening of Historic Collections: Observations on File Size, Biological Targets and File Diversity. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1998, 61, 61-67.
68. Villar, H.O.; Koehler, R.T. Comments on the Design of Chemical Libraries for Screening. Mol. Divers. 2000, 5, 13-24.
69. Nilakantan, R.; Nunn, D.S. A Fresh Look at Pharmaceutical Screening Library Design. Drug Discov. Today 2003, 8, 668-672.
70. Harper, G.; Pickett, S.D.; Green, D.V. Design of a Compound Screening Collection for use in High-Throughput Screening. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2004, 7, 63-71.
71. www.accelrys.com.
72. Dole, R.E. Comprehensive Survey of Combinatorial Library Synthesis 2002. J. Comb. Chem. 2003, 5, 693-753.
73. Martin, Y.C.; Kofron, J.L.; Traphagen, L.M. Do Structurally Similar Molecules Have Similar Biological Activity? J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 4350-4358.
74. Denessiouk, K.A.; Johnson, M.S. When Fold is not Important: A Common Structural Framework for Adenine and AMP Binding in 12 Unrelated Protein Families. Proteins 2000, 38, 310-326.
75. Jacoby, E.; Schuffenhauer, A.; Acklin, P. The Contribution of Molecular Informatics to Chemogenomics. Knowledge-based Discovery of Biological Targets and Chemical Lead Compounds. In:'Chemogenomics in Drug Discovery - A Medicinal Chemistry Perspective' ( Volume 22 of Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry, Eds. Mannhold, R.; Kubinyi, H.; Folkers, G.), Eds. Kubinyi, H; Müller, G. ), Eds. Kubinyi, G. Müller, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2004, pp. 139-166.
76. Savchuck, N.P.; Balakin. K.V.; Tkachenko, S.E. Exploring the Chemogenomic Knowledge Space with Annotated Chemical Libraries. Curr. Opin. Chem.Biol. 2004, 8, 412-417.
77. Schneider, G.; Neidhart, W.; Gillet, T.; Schmid, G. "Scaffold-Hopping" by Topological Pharmacophore Search: A Contribution to Virtual Screening. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1999, 38, 2894-2896.
78. von Korff, M.; Steger, M. GPCR-tailored Pharmacophore Pattern Recognition of Small Molecular Ligands. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1137-1147.
79. Hert, J.; Willett, P.; Wilton, D.J.; Acklin, P.; Azzaoui, K.; Jacoby, E.; Schuffenhauer, A. A Comparison of Fingerprint-Based Methods for Virtual Screening Using Multiple Bioactive Reference Structures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1177-1185.
80. Hert, J.; Willett, P.; Wilton, D.J.; Acklin, P.; Azzaoui, K.; Jacoby, E.; Schuffenhauer, A. Topological Descriptors for Similarity-based Virtual Screening Using Multiple Bioactive Reference Structures. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2004, 2, 3256-3266.
81. Roche, O.; Schneider, P.; Zuegge, J.; Guba, W.; Kansy, M.; Alanine, A.; Bleicher, K.; Danel, F.; Gutknecht, E.M.; Rogers-Evans, M.; Neidhart, W.; Stalder, H.; Dillon, M.; Sjogren, E.; Fotouhi, N.; Gillespie, P.; Goodnow, R.; Harris, W.; Jones, P.; Taniguchi, M.; Tsujii, S.; von der Saal, W.; Zimmermann, G.; Schneider, G. Development of a Virtual Screening Method for Identification of "Frequent Hitters" in Compound Libraries. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 137-142.
82. Seidler, J.; McGovern, S.L.; Doman, T.N.; Shoichet, K.K. Identification and Prediction of Promiscuous Aggregating Inhibitors Among Known Drugs. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 4477-4486.
83. Schuffenhauer, A.; Zimmermann, J.; Stoop, R.; van der Vyver, J.J.; Lecchini, S.; Jacoby, E. An Ontology for Pharmaceutical Ligands and its Application for Library Design and In Silico Screening. J. Chem. Inf. Comp. Sci. 2002, 42, 947-955.
84. Schuffenhauer, A.; Jacoby, E. Annotating and Mining the Ligand-target Chemogenomics Knowledge Space. BioSilico 2004, 2, 190-200.
85. www.aureus-pharma.com
86. www.sertanty.com
87. www.jubilantbiosys.com
88. www.inpharmatica.com
89. www.gvkbio.com
90. Strausberg, R.L.; Schreiber, S.L. From Knowing to Controlling: A Path From Genomics to Drugs Using Small Molecule Probes. Science 2003, 300, 294-295.
91. www.sunsetmolecular.com
92. Schneider, P.; Schneider, G. Collection of Bioactive Reference Compounds for Focused Library Design. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 2003, 22, 713-718.
93. Evans, B.E.; Rittle, K.E.; Bock, M.G.; DiPardo, R.M.; Freidinger, R.M.; Whitter, W.L.; Lundell, G.F.; Veber, D.F.; Anderson, P.S.; Chang, R.S. Methods for Drug Discovery: Development of Potent, Selective, Orally Effective Cholecystokinin Antagonists. J. Med. Chem. 1988, 31, 2235-2246.
94. Patchett, A.A.; Nargund, R.P. Privileged Structures - An Update, in: Trainor, G.L. (Ed.), Annual Reports in Medicinal Chemistry Vol. 35, Academic Press, San Diego 2000, pp. 289-298.
95. Engels, M.F. Creating Knowledge From High-throughput Screening Data. Ernst Schering Res. Found. Workshop 2003, 87-101.
96. Gedeck, P.; Willett, P. Visual and Computational Analysis of Structure-activity Relationships in High-Throughput Screening Data. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2001, 5, 389-395.
97. Sheridan, R.P. Finding Multiactivity Substructures by Mining Databases of Drug-like Compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 1037-1050.
98. Raymond, J.W.; Willett, P. Maximum Common Subgraph Isomorphism Algorithms for the Matching of Chemical Structures. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 2002, 16, 521-533.
99. Nicolaou, C.A.; Tamura, S.Y.; Kelley, B.P.; Bassett, S.I.; Nutt, R.F. Analysis of Large Screening Data Sets via Adaptively Grown Phylogenetic-like Trees. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 1069-1079.
100. Roberts, G.; Myatt, G.J.; Johnson, W.P.; Cross, K.P.; Blower, P.E. Jr. LeadScope: Software for Exploring Large Sets of Screening Data. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 1302-1314.
101. Bemis, G.W.; Murcko, M.A. The Properties of Known Drugs. 1. Molecular Frameworks. J. Med. Chem. 1996, 39, 2887-2893.
102. Pipeline Pilot Software, SciTegic™, www.scitegic.com.
103. Frye, S.V. Structure-Activity Relationship Homology (SARAH): A Conceptual Framework for Drug Discovery in the Genomic Era. Chem. Biol. 1999, 6, R3-R7.
104. Hajduk, P.J.; Bures, M.; Prestegaard, J.; Fesik, S.W. Privileged Molecules for Protein Binding Identified from NMR-based Screening. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 3443-3447.
105. Waldmann, H. At the Crossroads of Chemistry and Biology. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2003, 17, 3045-3051.
106. Venter, J.C. et al. The Sequence of the Human Genome. Science 2001, 291, 1304-1351.
107. Schreiber, S.L. Chemical Genetics Resulting from a Passion for Synthetic Organic Chemistry. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1998, 6, 1127-1152.
108. Stockwell, BR. Chemical Genetics: Ligand-Based Discovery of Gene Function. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2000, 1, 116-125.
109. Bredel, M.; Jacoby, E. Chemogenomics: An Emerging Strategy for Rapid Target and Drug Discovery. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2004, 5, 262-275.
110. Hopkins, A.L.; Groom, C.R. The Druggable Genome, Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2002, 1, 727-730.
111. Swindells, M.B.; Overington, J.P. Prioritizing the Proteome: Identifying Pharmaceutically Relevant Targets. Drug Discov. Today 2002, 1, 516-521.
112. Meisner, N.-C.; Hintersteiner, M.; Uhl, V.; Weidemann, T.; Schmied, M.; Gstach, H.; Auer, M. The Chemical Hunt for the Identification of Druggable Targets. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2001, 5, 744-750.
113. Yu. J.W.; Lemmon, M.A. Genome-wide analysis of signaling domain function. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2003, 7, 103-109.
114. Sharom, J.R.; Bellows, D.S.; Tyers, M. From Large Networks to Small Molecules. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 81-90.
115. Wermuth, C.G. Selective Optimization of Side Activities: Another Way for Drug Discovery. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 1303-1314.
116. Kubinyi, H. Drug Discovery from Side Effects. In:'Chemogenomics in Drug Discovery - A Medicinal Chemistry Perspective' ( Volume 22 of Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry, Eds. Eds. Mannhold, R.; Kubinyi, H.; Folkers, G.), Eds. Kubinyi, H; Müller, G. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2004, pp. 43-68.
117. Root, D.E.; Flaherty, S.P.; Kelley, B.P.; Stockwell, B.R. Biological Mechanism Profiling Using an Annotated Compound Library. Chem. Biol. 2003, 10, 881-892.
118. Eguchi, M.; McMillan, M.; Nguyen, C.; Teo, J.L.; Chi, E.Y.; Henderson, W.R., Jr.; Kahn, M. Chemogenomics with Peptide Secondary Structure Mimetics. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2003, 6, 611-621.
119. Abel, U.; Koch, C.; Speitling, M.; Hansske, F.G. Modern Methods to Produce Natural-Product Libraries. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2002, 6, 453-458.
120. Boldi, A.M. Libraries From Natural Products-like Scaffolds. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 281-286.
121. Burke, M.D.; Schreiber, S.L. A Planning Strategy for Diversity-oriented Synthesis. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2004, 43, 46-58.
122. Yarrow, J.C.; Feng, Y.; Perlman, Z.E.; Kirchhausen, T.; Mitchison, T.J. Phenotypic Screening of Small Molecule Libraries by High-Throughput Cell Imaging. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2003, 6, 279-286.
123. Breinhauer, R.; Vetter, I.R., Waldmann, H. From Protein Domains to Drug Candidates - Natural Products as Guiding Principles in the Design and Synthesis of Compound Libraries. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2002, 41, 2879-2890.
124. Orain, D.; Denay, R.; Koch, G.; Giger, R. Stereoselective Transformation of Indole Diazabicyclo[3.2.2]nonedione to Azepinoindole. Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 4709-4712.
125. Myers, A.G.; Lanman, B.A. A Solid-supported, Enantioselective Synthesis Suitable for the Rapid Generation of Large Numbers of Diverse Structural Analogues of (-)-Saframycin. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 12969-12971.
126. Fairlie, D. P.; West, M.; Wong, A. K. Towards Protein Surface Mimetics. Curr. Med. Chem. 1998, 5, 29-62.
127. Berg, T. Modulation of Protein-Protein Interactions with Small Organic Molecules. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2003, 42, 2462-2481.
128. Arkin, M.R.; Wells, J.A. Small-molecule Inhibitors of Protein-protein Interactions: Progressing Towards the Dream. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 2004, 3, 301-317.
129. Pagliaro, L.; Felding, J.; Audouze, K.; Jensby Nielsen, S.; Terry, R.B.; Krog-Jensen, C.; Butcher, S. Emerging Classes of Protein-protein Interaction Inhibitors and New Tools for their Development. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 442-449.
130. Ernst, J. T.; Kutzki, O.; Debnath, A. K.; Jiang, S.; Lu, H.; Hamilton, A. D. Design of a Protein Surface Antagonist Based on α-Helix Mimicry: Inhibition of gp41 Assembly and Viral Fusion. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2002, 41, 278-281.
131. Jacoby, E. Biphenyls as Potential Mimetics of Protein Alpha-Helix. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2002, 12, 891-893.
132. Rodriguez, A.L., Tamrazi, A., Collins, M.L., Katzenellenbogen, J.A. Design, Synthesis, and In Vitro Biological Evaluation of Small Molecule Inhibitors of Estrogen Receptor Alpha Coactivator Binding. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 600-611.
133. Lelais, G.; Seebach, D. Beta2-amino Acids - Syntheses, Occurrence in Natural Products, and Components of Beta-peptides1,2. Biopolymers 2004, 76, 206-243.
134. Nunn, C.; Rueping, M.; Langenegger, D.; Schuepbach, E.; Kimmerlin, T.; Micuch, P.; Hurth, K.; Seebach, D.; Hoyer, D. Beta(2)/beta(3)-di- and Alpha/beta(3)-tetrapeptide Derivatives as Potent Agonists at Somatostatin sst(4) Receptors. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch. Pharmacol. 2003, 367, 95-103.
135. Van de Waterbeemd, H; Gifford, E. ADMET In Silico Modelling: Towards Prediction Paradise? Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 192-541.
136. Davies, A.M.; Riley, R.J. Predictive ADMET Studies, the Challenges and the Opportunities. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 378-386.
137. Knowles, J.; Gromo, G. A. Guide to Drug Discovery: Target Selection in Drug Discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 63-69.