Informed toxicity assessment in drug discovery: Systems-based toxicology

Current Opinion in Drug Discovery and Development

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 75-83

  Mayne, James T ^a   Ku, Warren W ^a   Kennedy, Scott P ^a  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

Author keywords

Mechanistic; Predictive; Screening; Systems biology; Toxicology; Toxicophore

Indexed keywords

POTASSIUM CHANNEL HERG; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITOR; SEROTONIN UPTAKE INHIBITOR;

ARRHYTHMOGENESIS; CARCINOGENICITY; DOG; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG EXCRETION; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG SAFETY; ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; FLOW CYTOMETRY; FOLLOW UP; GENE SILENCING; GENOTOXICITY; HEART MUSCLE CELL; HISTORY; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MICRONUCLEUS TEST; MUSCLE INJURY; NONHUMAN; PRODUCTIVITY; QT PROLONGATION; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TORSADE DES POINTES; TOXICITY TESTING;

ANIMALS; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; DRUG TOXICITY; HUMANS; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITORS; SEROTONIN UPTAKE INHIBITORS; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; SYSTEMS BIOLOGY; TOXICITY TESTS; TOXICOLOGY;

EID: 30844456630     PISSN: 13676733     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Marton MJ, DeRisi L, Bennett HA, Iyer VR, Meyer MR, Roberts CJ, Stoughton R, Burchard J, Slade D, Dai H, Bassett DE et al: Drug target validation and identification of secondary drug target effects using DNA microarrays. Nat Med (1998) 4(11):1293-1301. Provides an early and fundamental example of the application of microarray technology to the drug discovery process.
2. Posner BA: High-throughput screening-driven lead discovery: Meeting the challenges of finding new therapeutics. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2005) 8(4):487-494.
3. Nikolsky Y, Ekins S, Nikolskaya T, Bugrim A: A novel method for generation of signature networks as biomarkers from complex high-throughout data. Toxicol Lett (2005) 158(1):20-29.
4. Kola I, Landis J: Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov (2004) 3(8):711-715. Provides a high level review of recent drug industry candidate attrition rates in terms of candidate development stage, cause of attrition and therapeutic area. The causes of attrition are discussed and general strategies to improve survival are provided.
5. Xu JJ, Diaz D, O'Brien PJ: Applications of cytotoxicity assays and pre-lethal mechanistic assays for assessment of human hepatotoxicity potential. Chem Biol Interact (2004) 160(1):115-128.
6. Rich IN, Hall KM: Validation and development of a predictive paradigm for hemotoxicology using a multifunctional bioluminescence colony-forming proliferation assay. Toxicol Sci (2005) 87(2):427-441.
7. Fermini B, Fossa AA: The impact of drug-induced QT interval prolongation on drug discovery and development. Nat Rev Drug Discov (2003) 2(6):439-447.
8. QT guidance reducing number of drugs leaving early development, firms say. PinkSheet (2005) 17 October.
9. Friedrichs GS, Patmore L, Bass A: Non-clinical evaluation of ventricular repolarization (ICH S7B): Results of an interim survey of international pharmaceutical companies. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods (2005) 52(1):6-11.
10. Apic G, Ignjatovic T, Boyer S, Russell RB: Illuminating drug discovery with biological pathways. FEBS Lett (2005) 579(8):1872-1877. Provides a well-positioned rationale for the value of a systems biology- or pathways-driven approach to characterizing druggable targets and for interrogating targets for potential adverse secondary effects.
11. Walker MJ, Barrett T, Guppy LJ: Functional pharmacology: The drug discovery bottleneck? Drug Disc Today: Targets (2004) 3(5):208-215. Makes the scientific and business case for the critical role of functional assessment of pharmacology as the enabler of reductionist drug discovery techniques.
12. Williams DP, Naisbitt DJ: Toxicophores: Groups and metabolic routes associated with increased safety risk. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2002) 5(1):104-115. Provides a classification model with numerous examples for organizing toxicophone knowledge.
13. Nassar AE, Lopez-Anaya A: Strategies for dealing with reactive intermediates in drug discovery and development. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2004) 7(1):126-136.
14. Helma C: In silico predictive toxicology: The state-of-the-art and strategies to predict human health effects. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2005) 8(1):27-31.
15. Jónsdóttir SÓ, Jorgensen FS, Brunak S: Prediction methods and databases within chemoinformatics: Emphasis on drugs and drug candidates. Bioinformatics (2005) 21(10):2145-2160.
16. SciFinder®: Part of the Process™: American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.cas.org/SCIFINDER/scicover2.html
17. Roter AH: Large-scale integrated databases supporting drug discovery. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2005) 8(3):309-315.
18. Torr-Brown S: Advances in knowledge management for pharmaceutical research and development. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2005) 8(3):316-322.
19. Cohen P: Protein kinases - the major drug targets of the twenty-first century? Nat Rev Drug Discov (2002) 1(4):309-315.
20. Vieth M, Sutherland JJ, Robertson DH, Campbell RM: Kinomics: Characterizing the therapeutically validated kinase space. Drug Disc Today (2005) 10(12):839-846.
21. Mortiock A, Keen NJ, Jung FH, Heron NM, Foote KM, Wilkinson R, Green S: Progress in the development of selective inhibitors of aurora kinases. Curr Topics Med Chem (2005) 5(2):199-213.
22. Carmena M, Earnshaw WC: The cellular geography of aurora kinases. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol (2003) 4(11):842-854.
23. Meraldi P, Honda R, Nigg EA: Aurora kinases link chromosome segregation and cell division to cancer susceptibility. Curr Opin Genet Dev (2004) 14(1):29-36.
24. Kearns WG, Liu JM: Cell cycle checkpoint genes and aneuploidy: A short review. Curr Genomics (2001) 2(2):171-180.
25. Bharadwaj R, Yu H: The spindle checkpoint, aneuploidy and cancer. Oncogene (2004) 23(11):2016-2027.
26. Giet R, Petretti C, Prigent C: Aurora kinases, aneuploidy and cancer, a coincidence or a real link? Trends Cell Biol (2005) 15(5):241-250.
27. Aardema MJ, Albertini S, Arni P, Henderson LM, Krisch-Volders M, Mackay JM, Sarriff AM, Stringer DA, Taalman RD: Aneuploidy: A report of an ECETOC task force. Mutat Res (1998) 410(1):3-79.
28. Aardema MJ, Kirsch-Volders M: The in vitro micronucleus assay. In: Genetic Toxicology and Cancer Risk Assessment. Choy WN (Ed), Marcel Dekker Inc, New York, NY, USA (2001):163-186.
29. Eastmond DA, Tucker JD: Kinetochore localization in micronucleated cytokinesis-blocked Chinese hamster ovary cells: A new and rapid assay for identifying aneuploidy-inducing agents. Mutat Res (1989) 224(4):517-525.
30. Muehlbauer PA, Schuler MJ: Detection of numerical chromosome aberrations by flow cytometry: A novel process for identifying aneugenic agents. Mutat Res (2005) 585(1-2):156-169.
31. Whitney JA: Reference systems for kinase drug discovery: Chemical genetic approaches to cell-based assays. Assay Drug Dev Technol (2004) 2(4):417-429.
32. Gallion SL, Qian D: Chemical genetic approaches to kinase drug discovery. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2005) 8(5):638-645.
33. Meador V, Jordan W, Zimmermann J: Increasing throughput in lead optimization in vivo toxicity screens. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2002) 5(1):72-78.