Computational target fishing: What should chemogenomics researchers expect for the future of in silico drug design and discovery?

Future Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 247-249

  Wang, Lirong ^a   Xie, Xiang Qun ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Big data; Chemogenomics; Cloud computation; Computational target fishing; Information integration

Indexed keywords

BIOINFORMATICS; COMPUTER MODEL; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG REPOSITIONING; HUMAN; INTEGRATION; LEARNING ALGORITHM; PHARMACOGENOMICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SCIENTIST;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DRUG DESIGN; GENOMICS; HUMANS;

EID: 84895450664     PISSN: 17568919     EISSN: 17568927     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4155/fmc.14.5     Document Type: Review

References (13)

1. Keiser MJ, Setola V, Irwin JJ et al. Predicting new molecular targets for known drugs. Nature 462(7270), 175-181 (2009).
2. Nidhi, Glick M, Davies JW, Jenkins JL. Prediction of biological targets for compounds using multiple-category Bayesian models trained on chemogenomics databases. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 46(3), 1124-1133 (2006).
3. Li H, Gao Z, Kang L et al. TarFisDock: A web server for identifying drug targets with docking approach. Nucleic Acids Res. 34(web server issue), W219-W224 (2006).
4. Cheng T, Li Q, Wang Y, Bryant SH. Identifying compound-Target associations by combining bioactivity profile similarity search and public databases mining. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 51(9), 2440-2448 (2011).
5. Jenkins JL, Bender A, Davies JW. In silico target fishing: Predicting biological targets from chemical structure. Drug Discov. Today 3(4), 413-421 (2007).
6. Rognan D. Computational approaches to target fishing and ligand profiling. AIP Conf. Proc. 1456, 157-164 (2012).
7. Rognan D. Structure-based approaches to target fishing and ligand profiling. Mol. Inform. 29(3), 176-187 (2010).
8. Meslamani J, Bhajun R, Martz F, Rognan D. Computational profiling of bioactive compounds using a target-dependent composite workflow. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 53(9), 2322-2333 (2013).
9. Ma C, Wang L, Xie XQ. GPU accelerated chemical similarity calculation for compound library comparison. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 51(7), 1521-1527 (2011).
10. Irwin JJ, Shoichet BK, Mysinger MM et al. Automated docking screens: A feasibility study. J. Med. Chem. 52(18), 5712-5720 (2009).
11. Chong CR. Repurposing drugs for tropical diseases: Case studies and open-source screening initiatives. In: Drug Repositioning: Bringing New Life to Shelved Assets and Existing Drugs. Frail DE (Ed.). John Wiley and Sons, Inc., NJ, USA, 347-373 (2012).
12. Eichler HG, Petavy F, Pignatti F, Rasi G. Access to patient-level trial data-A boon to drug developers. N. Engl. J. Med. 369(17), 1577-1579 (2013).
13. Wang L, Ma C, Wipf P, Liu H, Su W, Xie X-Q. TargetHunter: An in silico target identification tool for predicting therapeutic potential of small organic molecules based on chemogenomic database. AAPS J. 15(2), 395-406 (2013).