Structural Fragments in Marketed Oral Drugs

Fragment-based Approaches in Drug Discovery

Volumn 34, Issue , 2006, Pages 113-124

  Vieth, Michal ^a   Siegel, Miles ^a  

^a ELI LILLY AND COMPANY   (United States)

Author keywords

Analysis of similarities of different drug data sets; Analysis of structural fragments of drugs; Computional approaches; Drug discovery; Fragment frequencies; Fragment library design; Historical look; Methodology used in this analysis; Structural fragments in marketed oral drugs

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE;

ANALYSIS OF SIMILARITIES OF DIFFERENT DRUG DATA SETS; COMPUTIONAL APPROACHES; DRUG DISCOVERY; FRAGMENT FREQUENCIES; HISTORICAL LOOK; LIBRARY DESIGNS; METHODOLOGY USED IN THIS ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL FRAGMENTS;

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84876077616     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/3527608761.ch6     Document Type: Chapter

References (17)

1. Vieth, M., Siegel, M. G., Higgs, R. E., Watson, I. A., Robertson, D. H., Savin, K. A., Durst, G. L., Hipskind, P. A. 2004, Characteristic physical properties and structural fragments of marketed oral drugs. J. Med. Chem. 47, 224-232.
2. Leeson, P. D., Davis, A. M. 2004, Time-related differences in the physical property profiles of oral drugs. J. Med. Chem. 47, 6338-6348.
3. Proudfoot, J. R. 2005, The evolution of synthetic oral drug properties. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 15, 1087-1090.
4. Lewell, X. Q., Judd, D. B., Watson, S. P., Hann, M. M. 1998, RECAP-retrosynthetic combinatorial analysis procedure: a powerful new technique for identifying privileged molecular fragments with useful applications in combinatorial chemistry. J. Chem. Inform. Comput. Sci. 38, 511-522.
5. Bemis, G. W., Murcko, M. A. 1996, The properties of known drugs. 1. Molecular frameworks. J. Med. Chem. 39, 2887-2893.
6. Bemis, G. W., Murcko, M. A. 1999, Properties of known drugs. 2. Side chains. J. Med. Chem. 42, 5095-5099.
7. Aronov, A. M., Bemis, G. W. 2004, A minimalist approach to fragment-based ligand design using common rings and linkers: application to kinase inhibitors. Proteins Str. Funct. Bioinform. 57, 36-50.
8. Chen, G., Zheng, S., Luo, X., Shen, J., Zhu, W., Liu, H., Gui, C., Zhang, J., Zheng, M., Puah, C. M., Chen, K., Jiang, H. 2005, Focused combinatorial library design based on structural diversity, druglikeness and binding affinity score. J. Combin. Chem. (in press).
9. Todorov, N. P., Buenemann, C. L., Alberts, I. L. 2005, Combinatorial ligand design targeted at protein families. J. Chem. Inform. Mod. 45, 314-320.
10. Stahl, M., Todarov, N. P., James, T., Mauser, H., Boehm, H.-J., Dean, P. M. A. 2002, Validation study on the practical use of automated de novo design. J. Comp. Aided Mol. Des. 16, 459-478.
11. Rees, D. C., Congreve, M., Murray, C. W., Carr, R. 2004, Fragment-based lead discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Disc. 3, 660-672.
12. Erlanson, D. A., McDowell, R. S., O'Brien, T. 2004, Fragment-based drug discovery. J. Med. Chem. 47, 3463-3482.
13. DeSimone, R. W., Currie, K. S., Mitchell, S. A., Darrow, J. W., Pippin, D. A. 2004, Privileged structures: applications in drug discovery. Combin. Chem. HTS 7, 473-493.
14. Derwent 2001, Derwent World Drug Index, 2001-2002 edn, Derwent, London.
15. Walters, W. P., Stahl, M. T., Murcko, M. A. 1998, Virtual screening - an overview. Drug Discov. Today 3, 160-178.
16. MDL Information Systems 2002, MDL Drug Data Report 2002.2 edn, MDL Information Systems, London.
17. Leeson, P. D., Davis, A. M., Steele, J. 2004, Drug-like properties: guiding principles for design - or chemical prejudice? Drug Discov. Today: Tech. 1, 189-195.