The rise of the intelligent machines in drug hunting?

Future Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 405-408

  Griffen, Ed ^a  

^a ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; EDITORIAL; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MACHINE; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

DATABASES, FACTUAL; DRUG DISCOVERY; HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING ASSAYS;

EID: 77953386723     PISSN: 17568919     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4155/fmc.09.43     Document Type: Editorial

References (17)

1. Prentis RA, Lis Y, Walker SR. Pharmaceutical innovation by the seven UK-owned pharmaceutical companies (1964-1985). Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 25, 387-396 (1988).
2. Kola I, Landis J. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 711-716 (2004).
3. Lipinski CA, Lombardo F, Dominy BW et al. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug. Delivery Rev. 23, 3-25 (1997).
4. Lipinski CA. Originator of 'The Rule of Five' reflects on 10 years of drug development under its influence. Chem. Eng. News 85(45), 18 (2007).
5. Leeson PD, Springthorpe B. The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 6, 881-890 (2007).
6. Agrafiotis DK, Simson A, Dai H et al. Advanced biological and chemical discovery (ABCD): centralizing discovery knowledge in an inherently decentralized world. J. Chem. Inf. Model 47, 1999-2014 (2007).
7. Paolini GV, Shapland RHB, van Hoorn WP et al. Global mapping of pharmacological space. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 805-815 (2006).
8. Taylor KT. The status of electronic laboratory notebooks for chemistry and biology. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 9, 348-353 (2006).
9. Leach AG, Jones HD, Cosgrove DA et al. Matched molecular pairs as a guide in the optimization of pharmaceutical properties; a study of aqueous solubility, plasma protein binding and oral exposure. J. Med. Chem. 49, 6672-6682 (2006).
10. Lewis ML, Cucurull-Sanchez L. Structural pairwise comparisons of HLM stability of phenyl derivatives: Introduction of the Pfizer metabolism index (PMI) and metabolism-lipophilicity efficiency (MLE). J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 23, 97-103 (2009).
11. Stewart KD, Shiroda M, James CA. Drug guru: a computer software program for drug design using medicinal chemistry rules. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 14, 7011-7022 (2006).
12. McGregor JJ, Peter Willett P. Use of a maximum common subgraph algorithm in the automatic identification of ostensible bond changes occurring in chemical reactions: J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 21, 137-140 (1981).
13. Sheridan RP, Hunt P, Culberson JC. Molecular transformations as a way of finding and exploiting consistent local QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 46, 180-192 (2006).
14. Davenport TH. Competing on analytics. Harvard Business Review. 1 January 2006.
15. Linden G, Smith B, York J. Amazon.com recommendations: item-to-item collaborative filtering. IEEE Int. Comp. 76-80 (2003).
16. Berwick DM, Calkins DR, McCannon CJ et al. The 100,000 lives campaign: setting a goal and a deadline for improving health care quality. JAMA 295, 324-327 (2006).
17. Ramnarayan P, Cronje N, Brown R et al. Validation of a diagnostic reminder system in emergency medicine: a multi-centre study. Emerg. Med. J. 24, 619-624 (2007).