Automating drug discovery

Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2018, Pages 97-113

  Schneider, Gisbert ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMOKINE RECEPTOR CXCR4; DEATH ASSOCIATED PROTEIN KINASE; FASUDIL; G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR; IMIDAZOPYRIDINE DERIVATIVE; RHO KINASE; VASCULOTROPIN RECEPTOR; DRUG;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; AUTOMATION; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY; CYCLOADDITION; DECISION MAKING; DNA BARCODING; DRUG ACTIVITY; DRUG DETERMINATION; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG POTENCY; DRUG SCREENING; EVAPORATION; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; LYMPHOCYTE TRANSFORMATION; MACHINE LEARNING; MICROFLUIDICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REVIEW; ROBOTICS; STEREOCHEMISTRY; ULTRAVIOLET IRRADIATION; ANIMAL; CHEMISTRY; DRUG INDUSTRY; HUMAN; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; DRUG DISCOVERY; DRUG INDUSTRY; HUMANS; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS;

EID: 85041303900     PISSN: 14741776     EISSN: 14741784     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrd.2017.232     Document Type: Review

References (249)

1. King, R. D. et al. The automation of science. Science 324, 85-89 (2009).
2. Chapman, T. Lab automation and robotics: Automation on the move. Nature 421, 661-666 (2003).
3. Sanderson, K. March of the synthesis machines. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 14, 299-300 (2015).
4. Lindsay, R. K., Buchanan, B. G., Feigenbaum, E. A. & Lederberg, J. DENDRAL: A case study of the first expert system for scientific hypothesis formation. Artif. Intell. 61, 209-261 (1993).
5. Johnson, A. P. & Marshall, C. Starting material oriented retrosynthetic analysis in the LHASA program. 3. Heuristic estimation of synthetic proximity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 32, 426-429 (1992).
6. Cho, S. J., Sun, Y. & Harte, W. ADAAPT: Amgen's data access, analysis, and prediction tools. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 20, 249-261 (2006).
7. Schneider, G. De novo Molecular Design (Wiley-VCH, 2013).
8. Sparkes, A. et al. Towards robot scientists for autonomous scientific discovery. Autom. Exp. 4, 1 (2010).
9. MacConnell, A. B., Price, A. K. & Paegel, B. M. An integrated microfluidic processor for DNA-encoded combinatorial library functional screening. ACS Comb. Sci. 19, 181-192 (2017).
10. Baranczak, A. et al. Integrated platform for expedited synthesis-purification-testing of small molecule libraries. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 8, 461-465 (2017).
11. Vasudevan, A., Bogdan, A. R., Koolman, H. F., Wang, Y. & Djuric, S. W. Enabling chemistry technologies and parallel synthesis-accelerators of drug discovery programmes. Prog. Med. Chem. 56, 1-35 (2017).
12. Esch, E. W., Bahinski, A. & Huh, D. Organs-on-chips at the frontiers of drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 14, 248-260 (2015).
13. Eglen, R. M. & Randle, D. H. Drug discovery goes three-dimensional: goodbye to flat high-throughput screening Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 13, 262-265 (2015).
14. Jones, L. H. & Bunnage, M. E. Applications of chemogenomic library screening in drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 16, 285-296 (2017).
15. Schreiber, S. L. Target-oriented and diversity-oriented organic synthesis in drug discovery. Science 287, 1964-1969 (2000).
16. O' Connor, C. J., Beckmann, H. S. & Spring, D. R. Diversity-oriented synthesis: producing chemical tools for dissecting biology. Chem. Soc. Rev. 41, 4444-4456 (2012).
17. Maurya, S. K. & Rana, R. An eco-compatible strategy for the diversity-oriented synthesis of macrocycles exploiting carbohydrate-derived building blocks. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 13, 1106-1118 (2017).
18. Maier, M. E. Design and synthesis of analogues of natural products. Org. Biomol. Chem. 13, 5302-5343 (2015).
19. Wetzel, S., Bon, R. S., Kumar, K. & Waldmann, H. Biology-oriented synthesis. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 50, 10800-10826 (2011).
20. Wilk, W., Zimmermann, T. J., Kaiser, M. & Waldmann, H. Principles, implementation, and application of biology-oriented synthesis (BIOS). Biol. Chem. 391, 491-497 (2010).
21. Wender, P. A., Verma, V. A., Paxton, T. J. & Pillow, T. H. Function-oriented synthesis, step economy, and drug design. Acc. Chem. Res. 41, 40-49 (2008).
22. Wender, P. A., Quiroz, R. V. & Stevens, M. C. Function through synthesis-informed design. Acc. Chem. Res. 48, 752-760 (2015).
23. Ichikawa, S. Function-oriented synthesis: how to design simplified analogues of antibacterial nucleoside natural products Chem. Rec. 16, 1106-1115 (2016).
24. 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 Del. Rev. 46, 3-26 (2001).
25. Walters, W. P., Ajay & Murcko, M. A. Recognizing molecules with drug-like properties. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 3, 384-387 (1999).
26. Leeson, P. D. & Springthorpe, B. The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 6, 881-890 (2007).
27. Bickerton, G. R., Paolini, G. V., Besnard, J., Muresan, S. & Hopkins, A. L. Quantifying the chemical beauty of drugs. Nat. Chem. 4, 90-98 (2012).
28. Yusof, I. & Segall, M. D. Considering the impact drug-like properties have on the chance of success. Drug Discov. Today 18, 659-666 (2013).
29. Ajay, A., Walters, W. P. & Murcko, M. A. Can we learn to distinguish between "drug-like" and "nondrug-like" molecules J. Med. Chem. 41, 3314-3324 (1998).
30. Sadowski, J. & Kubinyi, H. A scoring scheme for discriminating between drugs and nondrugs. J. Med. Chem. 41, 3325-3329 (1998).
31. Leeson, P. D. Molecular inflation, attrition and the rule of five. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 101, 22-33 (2016).
32. Leahy, D. E. & Sykora, V. Automation of decision making in drug design. Drug Discov. Today Technol. 10, e437-e441 (2013).
33. Nicolaou, C. A. & Brown, N. Multi-objective optimization methods in drug design. Drug Discov. Today Technol. 10, e427-e435 (2013).
34. Harrison, S. et al. Extending 'predict first' to the design-make-test cycle in small-molecule drug discovery. Future Med. Chem. 9, 533-536 (2017).
35. Soldatova, L. N., Rzhetsky, A., De Grave, K. & King, R. D. Representation of probabilistic scientific knowledge. J. Biomed. Semantics 4 (Suppl. 1), S7 (2013).
36. Zhu, Q. et al. Semantic inference using chemogenomics data for drug discovery. BMC Bioinformatics 12, 256 (2011).
37. White, D. & Wilson, R. C. Generative models for chemical structures. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 50, 1257-1274 (2010).
38. Gupta, A. et al. Generative recurrent networks for de novo design. Mol. Inf. 36, 1700111 (2017).
39. Miyao, T., Arakawa, M. & Funatsu, K. Exhaustive structure generation for inverse-QSPR/QSAR. Mol. Inf. 29, 111-125 (2010).
40. Miyao, T., Kaneko, H. & Funatsu, K. Inverse QSPR/ QSAR analysis for chemical structure generation (from y to x). J. Chem. Inf. Model. 56, 286-299 (2016).
41. Gaspar, H. A., Baskin, I. I., Marcou, G., Horvath, D. & Varnek, A. Stargate GTM: bridging descriptor and activity spaces. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 55, 2403-2410 (2015).
42. Schneider, G., Funatsu, K., Okuno, J. & Winkler, D. De novo drug design-ye olde scoring problem revisited. Mol. Inf. 36, 1681031 (2017).
43. Reutlinger, M., Rodrigues, T., Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. Combining on-chip synthesis of a focused combinatorial library with computational target prediction reveals imidazopyridine GPCR ligands. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53, 582-585 (2014).
44. Reutlinger, M., Rodrigues, T., Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. Multi-objective molecular de novo design by adaptive fragment prioritization. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53, 4244-4248 (2014).
45. Rodrigues, T. et al. Multidimensional de novo design reveals 5-HT2B receptor-selective ligands. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54, 1551-1555 (2015).
46. Schneider, P., Röthlisberger, M., Reker, D. & Schneider, G. Spotting and designing promiscuous ligands for drug discovery. Chem. Commun. 52, 1135-1138 (2016).
47. Rodrigues, T. et al. De novo fragment design for drug discovery and chemical biology. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54, 15079-15083 (2015).
48. Rodrigues, T. et al. Steering target selectivity and potency by fragment-based de novo drug design. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 52, 10006-10009 (2013).
49. Besnard, J. et al. Automated design of ligands to polypharmacological profiles. Nature 492, 215-220 (2012).
50. Willot, M. et al. Total synthesis and absolute configuration of the guaiane sesquiterpene Englerin A. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 48, 9105-9108 (2009).
51. Kusama, H., Tazawa, A., Ishida, K. & Iwasawa, N. Total synthesis of ()-Englerin A using an intermolecular [3 + 2] cycloaddition reaction of platinum-containing carbonyl ylide. Chem. Asian J. 11, 64-67 (2016).
52. Friedrich, L., Rodrigues, T., Neuhaus, C. S., Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. From complex natural products to simple synthetic mimetics by computational de novo design. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55, 6789-6792 (2016).
53. Antolín, A. A. & Mestres, J. Distant polypharmacology among MLP chemical probes. ACS Chem. Biol. 10, 395-400 (2015).
54. Reker, D., Rodrigues, T., Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. Identifying the macromolecular targets of de novo-designed chemical entities through self-organizing map consensus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 4067-4072 (2014).
55. Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. Privileged structures revisited. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 56, 7971-7974 (2017).
56. Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. A computational method for unveiling the target promiscuity of pharmacologically active compounds. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 56, 11520-11524 (2017).
57. Ley, S. V., Fitzpatrick, D. E., Ingham, R. J. & Myers, R. M. Organic synthesis: march of the machines. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54, 3449-3464 (2015).
58. Merrifield, R. B. Solid phase peptide synthesis. I. The synthesis of a tetrapeptide. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 85, 2149-2154 (1963).
59. Palomo, J. M. Solid-phase peptide synthesis: An overview focused on the preparation of biologically relevant peptides. RSC Adv. 4, 32658-32672 (2014).
60. Kosuri, S. & Church, G. M. Large-scale de novo DNA synthesis: Technologies and applications. Nat. Methods 11, 499-507 (2014).
61. Wan, W. B. & Seth, P. P. The medicinal chemistry of therapeutic oligonucleotides. J. Med. Chem. 59, 9645-9667 (2016).
62. Seeberger, P. H. & Werz, D. B. Synthesis and medical applications of oligosaccharides. Nature 446, 1046-1051 (2007).
63. Koppitz, M. & Eis, K. Automated medicinal chemistry. Drug Discov. Today 11, 561-568 (2006).
64. Liu, R., Li, X. & Lam, K. S. Combinatorial chemistry in drug discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 38, 117-126 (2017).
65. Godfrey, A. G., Masquelin, T. & Hemmerle, H. A remote-controlled adaptive medchem lab: An innovative approach to enable drug discovery in the 21st Century. Drug Discov. Today 18, 795-802 (2013).
66. Nicolaou, C. A., Watson, I. A., Hu, H. & Wang, J. The Proximal Lilly Collection: mapping, exploring and exploiting feasible chemical space. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 56, 1253-1266 (2016).
67. Crooks, S. L. & Charles, L. J. Overview of combinatorial chemistry. Curr. Protoc. Pharmacol. 9, Unit 9. 3 (2001).
68. Long, A. Parallel chemistry in the 21st century. Curr. Protoc. Pharmacol. 9, Unit9. 16 (2012).
69. Ingallina, C. et al. The Pictet-Spengler reaction still on stage. Curr. Pharm. Des. 22, 1808-1850 (2016).
70. Pirrung, M. C. Molecular Diversity and Combinatorial Chemistry (Elsevier, 2004).
71. Roughley, S. D. & Jordan, A. M. The medicinal chemist's toolbox: An analysis of reactions used in the pursuit of drug candidates. J. Med. Chem. 54, 3451-3479 (2011).
72. Brown, D. G. & Boström, J. Analysis of past and present synthetic methodologies on medicinal chemistry: where have all the new reactions gone J. Med. Chem. 59, 4443-4458 (2016).
73. Collins, K. D., Gensch, T. & Glorius, F. Contemporary screening approaches to reaction discovery and development. Nat. Chem. 6, 859-871 (2014).
74. Li, J. et al. Synthesis of many different types of organic small molecules using one automated process. Science 347, 1221-1226 (2015).
75. Li, J., Grillo, A. S. & Burke, M. D. From synthesis to function via iterative assembly of N-methyliminodiacetic acid boronate building blocks. Acc. Chem. Res. 48, 2297-2307 (2015).
76. LaPorte, T. L. & Wang, C. Continuous processes for the production of pharmaceutical intermediates and active pharmaceutical ingredients. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 10, 738-745 (2007).
77. Chin, P., Barney, W. S. & Pindzola, B. A. Microstructured reactors as tools for the intensification of pharmaceutical reactions and processes. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 12, 848-861 (2009).
78. Dressler, O. J., Maceiczyk, R. M., Chang, S. I. & deMello, A. J. Droplet-based microfluidics: enabling impact on drug discovery. J. Biomol. Screen. 19, 483-496 (2014).
79. Shultz, S. et al. Miniaturized GPCR signaling studies in 1536-well format. J. Biomol. Tech. 19, 267-274 (2008).
80. Kanigowska, P., Shen, Y., Zheng, Y., Rosser, S. & Cai, Y. Smart DNA fabrication using sound waves: Applying acoustic dispensing technologies to synthetic biology. J. Lab. Autom. 21, 49-56 (2016).
81. Sackmann, E. K. et al. Technologies that enable accurate and precise nano-to milliliter-scale liquid dispensing of aqueous reagents using acoustic droplet ejection. J. Lab. Autom. 21, 166-177 (2016).
82. Hadimioglu, B., Stearns, R. & Ellson, R. Moving liquids with sound: The physics of acoustic droplet ejection for robust laboratory automation in life sciences. J. Lab. Autom. 21, 4-18 (2016).
83. Squires, T. M. & Quake, S. R. Microfluidics: fluid physics at the nanoliter scale. Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 977-1026 (2005).
84. Yoshida, J., Nagaki, A. & Yamada, D. Continuous flow synthesis. Drug Discov. Today Technol. 10, e53-e59 (2013).
85. Rodrigues, T., Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. Accessing new chemical entities through microfluidic systems. Angew. Chem. Ind. Ed. 53, 5750-5758 (2014).
86. Hopkin, M. D., Baxendale, I. R. & Ley, S. V. A flow-based synthesis of imatinib: The API of Gleevec. Chem. Commun. 46, 2450-2452 (2010).
87. Murray, P. R. D. et al. Continuous flow-processing of organometallic reagents using an advanced peristaltic pumping system and the telescoped flow synthesis of (E/Z)-tamoxifen. Org. Process Res. Dev. 17, 1192-1208 (2013).
88. Pastre, J. C., Browne, D. L. & Ley, S. V. Flow chemistry syntheses of natural products. Chem. Soc. Rev. 42, 8849-8869 (2013).
89. Saaby, S., Knudsen, K. R., Ladlow, M. & Ley, S. V. The use of a continuous flow-reactor employing a mixed hydrogen-liquid flow stream for the efficient reduction of imines to amines. Chem. Commun. 23, 2909-2911 (2005).
90. Baxendale, I. R., Hayward, J. J. & Ley, S. V. Microwave reactions under continuous flow conditions. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 10, 802-836 (2007).
91. Brzozowski, M., O'Brien, M., Ley, S. V. & Polyzos, A. Flow chemistry: intelligent processing of gas-liquid transformations using a tube-in-tube reactor. Acc. Chem. Res. 48, 349-362 (2015).
92. Wong-Hawkes, S. Y., Matteo, J. C., Warrington, B. H. & White, J. D. in New Avenues to Efficient Chemical Synthesis Vol. 2006 (eds Seeberger, P. H. & Blume, T.) 39-55 (2007).
93. Fernandez-Suarez, M., Wong, S. Y. & Warrington, B. H. Synthesis of a three-member array of cycloadducts in a glass microchip under pressure driven flow. Lab Chip 2, 170-174 (2002).
94. Jönsson, D., Warrington, B. H. & Ladlow, M. Automated flow-through synthesis of heterocyclic thioethers. J. Comb. Chem. 6, 584-595 (2004).
95. Garcia-Egido, E., Spikmans, V., Wong, S. Y. & Warrington, B. H. Synthesis and analysis of combinatorial libraries performed in an automated micro reactor system. Lab Chip 3, 73-76 (2003).
96. Newton, S. et al. Accelerating spirocyclic polyketide synthesis using flow chemistry. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53, 4915-4920 (2014).
97. Adamo, A. et al. On-demand continuous-flow production of pharmaceuticals in a compact, reconfigurable system. Science 352, 61-67 (2016).
98. Hochlowski, J. E. et al. An integrated synthesis-purification system to accelerate the generation of compounds in pharmaceutical discovery. J. Flow Chem. 2, 56-61 (2011).
99. Lange, P. P. & James, K. Rapid access to compound libraries through flow technology: fully automated synthesis of a 3-aminoindolizine library via orthogonal diversification. ACS Comb. Sci. 14, 570-578 (2012).
100. Yoshida, J., Nagaki, A. & Yamada, T. Flash chemistry: fast chemical synthesis by using microreactors. Chemistry 14, 7450-7459 (2008).
101. Yoshida, J., Takahashi, Y. & Nagaki, A. Flash chemistry: flow chemistry that cannot be done in batch. Chem. Commun. 49, 9896-9904 (2013).
102. Nagaki, A., Imai, K., Kim, H. & Yoshida, J. Flash synthesis of TAC-101 and its analogues from 1, 3, 5-tribromobenzene using integrated flow microreactor systems. RSC Adv. 1, 758-760 (2011).
103. Carneiro, P. F., Gutmann, B., de Souza, R. O. M. A. & Kappe, O. Process intensified flow synthesis of 1H-4-substituted imidazoles: Toward the continuous production of Daclatasvir. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 3, 3445-3453 (2015).
104. Stalder, R. & Roth, G. P. Preparative microfluidic electrosynthesis of drug metabolites. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 4, 1119-1123 (2013).
105. Genovino, J., Sames, D., Hamann, L. G. & Touré, B. B. Accessing drug metabolites via transition-metal catalyzed C-H oxidation: The liver as synthetic inspiration. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55, 14218-14238 (2016).
106. Britton, J. & Raston, C. L. Multi-step continuous-flow synthesis. Chem. Soc. Rev. 46, 1250-1271 (2017).
107. Reizman, B. J. & Jensen, K. F. Feedback in flow for accelerated reaction development. Acc. Chem. Res. 49, 1786-1796 (2016).
108. McMullen, J. P., Stone, M. T., Buchwald, S. L. & Jensen, K. F. An integrated microreactor system for self-optimization of a Heck reaction: from micro-to mesoscale flow systems. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 49, 7076-7080 (2010).
109. Cortés-Borda, D. et al. Optimizing the Heck-Matsuda reaction in flow with a constraint-adapted direct search algorithm. Org. Process Res. Dev. 20, 1979-1987 (2016).
110. Falcone, C. E. et al. Reaction screening and optimization of continuous-flow atropine synthesis by preparative electrospray mass spectrometry. Analyst 142, 2836-2845 (2017).
111. Huang, C. M., Zhu, Y., Jin, D. Q., Kelly, R. T. & Fang, Q. Direct surface and droplet microsampling for electrospray ionization mass spectrometry analysis with an integrated dual-probe microfluidic chip. Anal. Chem. 89, 9009-9016 (2017).
112. Hartman, R. L., McMullen, J. P. & Jensen, K. F. Deciding whether to go with the flow: evaluating the merits of flow reactors for synthesis. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 50, 7502-7519 (2011).
113. Shevlin, M. Practical high-throughput experimentation for chemists. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 8, 601-607 (2017).
114. Chow, S. Y. & Nelson, A. Embarking on a chemical space odyssey. J. Med. Chem. 60, 3591-3593 (2017).
115. Moore, J. S. & Jensen, K. F. "Batch" kinetics in flow: online IR analysis and continuous control. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53, 470-473 (2014).
116. Haeberle, S. & Zengerle, R. Microfluidic platforms for lab-on-a-chip applications. Lab Chip 7, 1094-10110 (2007).
117. Jeong, G. S., Chung, S., Kim, C. B. & Lee, S. H. Applications of micromixing technology. Analyst 135, 460-473 (2010).
118. Fratila, R. M. & Velders, A. H. Small-volume nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 4, 227-249 (2011).
119. Capel, A. J. et al. 3D printed fluidics with embedded analytic functionality for automated reaction optimisation. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 13, 111-119 (2017).
120. Chiu, D. T. & Lorenz, R. M. Chemistry and biology in femtoliter and picoliter volume droplets. Acc. Chem. Res. 42, 649-658 (2009).
121. He, M. et al. Selective encapsulation of single cells and subcellular organelles into picoliter-and femtoliter-volume droplets. Anal. Chem. 77, 1539-1544 (2005).
122. Theberge, A. B. et al. Microdroplets in microfluidics: An evolving platform for discoveries in chemistry and biology. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 49, 5846-5868 (2010).
123. Lignos, I. et al. Synthesis of Cesium lead halide Perovskite nanocrystals in a droplet-based microfluidic platform: fast parametric space mapping. Nano Lett. 16, 1869-1877 (2016).
124. Krishnadasan, S., Brown, R. J., deMello, A. J. & deMello, J. C. Intelligent routes to the controlled synthesis of nanoparticles. Lab Chip 7, 1434-1441 (2007).
125. Beulig, R. J. et al. A droplet-chip/mass spectrometry approach to study organic synthesis at nanoliter scale. Lab Chip 17, 1996-2002 (2017).
126. Dittrich, P. S. & Manz, A. Lab-on-a-chip: microfluidics in drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 5, 210-218 (2006).
127. Skardal, A., Shupe, T. & Atala, A. Organoid-on-a-chip and body-on-a-chip systems for drug screening and disease modeling. Drug Discov. Today 21, 1399-1411 (2016).
128. Zakhariants, A. A., Burmistrova, O. A., Shkurnikov, M. Y., Poloznikov, A. A. & Sakharov, D. A. Development of a specific substrate-inhibitor panel (liver-on-a-chip) for evaluation of cytochrome P450 activity. Bull. Exp. Biol. Med. 162, 170-174 (2016).
129. Kirchmair, J. et al. Predicting drug metabolism: experiment and/or computation Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 14, 387-404 (2015).
130. Zhang, Y. S., Zhang, Y. N. & Zhang, W. Cancer-on-a-chip systems at the frontier of nanomedicine. Drug Discov. Today 22, 1392-1399 (2017).
131. Galler, K., Bräutigam, K., Große, C., Popp, J. & Neugebauer, U. Making a big thing of a small cell-recent advances in single cell analysis. Analyst 139, 1237-1273 (2014).
132. Loskill, P. et al. WAT-on-a-chip: A physiologically relevant microfluidic system incorporating white adipose tissue. Lab Chip. 17, 1645-1654 (2017).
133. Cao, Z., Chen, C., He, B., Tan, K. & Lu, C. A microfluidic device for epigenomic profiling using 100 cells. Nat. Methods 12, 959-962 (2015).
134. Kurita, R. & Niwa, O. Microfluidic platforms for DNA methylation analysis. Lab Chip 16, 3631-3644 (2016).
135. Eyer, K., Stratz, S., Kuhn, P., Küster, S. K. & Dittrich, P. S. Implementing enzyme-linked imunosorbent assays on a microfluidic chip to quantify intracellular molecules in single cells. Anal. Chem. 85, 3280-3287 (2013).
136. Adriani, G., Ma, D., Pavesi, A., Gohm, E. L. & Kamm, R. D. Modeling the blood-brain barrier in a 3D triple co-culture microfluidic system. Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2015, 338-341 (2015).
137. Huang, T. Y. et al. 3D printed microtransporters: compound micromachines for spatiotemporally controlled delivery of therapeutic agents. Adv. Mater. 42, 6644-6650 (2015).
138. Kara, A. et al. Electrochemical imaging for microfluidics: A full-system approach. Lab Chip 16, 1081-1087 (2016).
139. Kara, A. et al. Towards a multifunctional electrochemical sensing and niosome generation lab-on-chip platform based on a plug-and-play concept. Sensors 16, 778 (2016).
140. Hartmann, D. M. et al. Microfluidic chip apparatuses, systems and methods having fluidic and fiber optic interconnections. US Patent 20090147253 A1(2007).
141. Desai, B. et al. Rapid discovery of a novel series of Abl kinase inhibitors by application of an integrated microfluidic synthesis and screening platform. J. Med. Chem. 56, 3033-3047 (2013).
142. Wang, Y. et al. An integrated microfluidic device for large-scale in situ click chemistry screening. Lab. Chip 9, 2281-2285 (2009).
143. Lombardi, D. & Dittrich, P. S. Advances in microfluidics for drug discovery. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 5, 1081-1094 (2010).
144. Wen, N. et al. Development of droplet microfluidics enabling high-throughput single-cell analysis. Molecules 21, 881 (2016).
145. Kang, D. K. et al. 3D droplet microfluidic systems for high-throughput biological experimentation. Anal. Chem. 87, 10770-10778 (2015).
146. Agresti, J. J. et al. Ultrahigh-throughput screening in drop-based microfluidics for directed evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 4004-4009 (2010).
147. Obexer, R. et al. Emergence of a catalytic tetrad during evolution of a highly active artificial aldolase. Nat. Chem. 9, 50-56 (2017).
148. Du, G., Fang, Q. & den Toonder, J. M. Microfluidics for cell-based high throughput screening platforms-a review. Anal. Chim. Acta 903, 36-50 (2016).
149. Zhu, Z. & Yang, C. J. Hydrogel droplet microfluidics for high-throughput single molecule/cell analysis. Acc. Chem. Res. 50, 22-31 (2017).
150. Fenneteau, J., Chauvin, D., Griffiths, A. D., Nizak, C. & Cossy, J. Synthesis of new hydrophilic rhodamine based enzymatic substrates compatible with droplet-based microfluidic assays. Chem. Commun. 53, 5437-5440 (2017).
151. Khalid, N., Kobayashi, I. & Nakajima, M. Recent lab-on-chip developments for novel drug discovery. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Syst. Biol. Med. 6, e1381 (2017).
152. Corey, E. J. General methods for the construction of complex molecules. Pure Appl. Chem. 14, 19-38 (1967).
153. Ihlenfeldt, W. D. & Gasteiger, J. Computer-assisted planning of organic syntheses: The second generation of programs. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 34, 2613-2633 (1996).
154. Cook, A. et al. Computer-aided synthesis design: 40 years on. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci. 2, 79-107 (2011).
155. Ravitz, O. Data-driven computer aided synthesis design. Drug Discov. Today Technol. 10, e443-e449 (2013).
156. Chen, J. H. & Baldi, P. No electron left behind: A rule-based expert system to predict chemical reactions and reaction mechanisms. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 49, 2034-2043 (2009).
157. Kayala, M. A. et al. Learning to predict chemical reactions. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 51, 2209-2222 (2011).
158. Kowalik, M. et al. Parallel optimization of synthetic pathways within the Network of Organic Chemistry. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 51, 7928-7932 (2012).
159. Szymkuc, S. et al. Computer-assisted synthetic planning: The end of the beginning. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55, 5904-5937 (2016).
160. Coley, C. W., Barzilay, R., Jaakkola, T. S., Green, W. H. & Jensen, K. F. Prediction of organic reaction outcomes using machine learning. ACS Cent. Sci. 3, 434-443 (2017).
161. Whelan, K. E. & King, R. D. Intelligent software for laboratory automation. Trends Biotechnol. 22, 440-445 (2004).
162. Reker, D. & Schneider, G. Active learning strategies in computer-assisted drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 20, 458-465 (2015).
163. Schneider, G. & Fechner, U. Computer-based de novo design of drug-like molecules. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 4, 649-663 (2005).
164. Hartenfeller, M. & Schneider, G. Enabling future drug discovery by de novo design. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci. 1, 742-759 (2011).
165. Rodrigues, T. & Schneider, G. Flashback forward: reaction-driven de novo design of bioactive compounds. Synlett 25, 170-178 (2014).
166. Hunter, J. Adopting AI is essential for a sustainable pharma industry. Drug Discov. World Winter 2016/2017, 69-71 (2017).
167. Kramer, C., Fuchs, J. E. & Liedl, K. R. Strong nonadditivity as a key structure-activity relationship feature: distinguishing structural changes from assay artifacts. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 55, 483-494 (2015).
168. Schonherr, H. & Cernak, T. Profound methyl effects in drug discovery and a call for new C-H methylation meactions. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 52, 12256-12267 (2013).
169. Kuhn, B., Fuchs, J. E., Reutlinger, M., Stahl, M. & Taylor, N. R. Rationalizing tight ligand binding through cooperative interaction networks. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 51, 3180-3198 (2011).
170. Reker, D., Schneider, P., Schneider, G. & Brown, J. B. Active learning for computational chemogenomics. Future Med. Chem. 9, 381-402 (2017).
171. Lang, T., Flachsenberg, F., von Luxburg, U. & Rarey, M. Feasibility of active machine learning for multiclass compound classification. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 56, 12-20 (2016).
172. Schüller, A. & Schneider, G. Identification of hits and lead structure candidates with limited resources by adaptive optimization. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 48, 1473-1491 (2008).
173. Reutlinger, M. et al. Neighborhood-preserving visualization of adaptive structure-activity landscapes: Application to drug discovery. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 50, 11633-11636 (2011).
174. Hiss, J. A. et al. Combinatorial chemistry by ant colony optimization. Future Med. Chem. 6, 267-280 (2014).
175. Reker, D., Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. Multi-objective active machine learning rapidly improves structure-activity models and reveals new protein-protein interaction inhibitors. Chem. Sci. 7, 3919-3927 (2016).
176. Schneider, G., Schuchhardt, J. & Wrede, P. Artificial neural networks and simulated molecular evolution are potential tools for sequence-oriented protein design. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 10, 635-645 (1994).
177. Schneider, G. et al. Peptide design by artificial neural networks and computer-based evolutionary search. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, 12179-12184 (1998).
178. Schneider, G. & Wrede, P. Artificial neural networks for computer-based molecular design. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 70, 175-222 (1998).
179. Zupan, J. & Gasteiger, J. Neural networks: A new method for solving chemical problems or just a passing phase Anal. Chim. Acta 248, 1-30 (1991).
180. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. & Hinton, G. Deep learning. Nature 521, 436-444 (2015).
181. Baskin, I. I., Winkler, D. & Tetko, I. V. A renaissance of neural networks in drug discovery. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 11, 785-795 (2016).
182. Jouppi, N. P. et al. in Proceedings of the 44th International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA) http://dx. doi. org/10. 1145/3079856. 3080246 (Toronto, 2017).
183. Sato, K., Young, C. & Patterson, D. An in-depth look at Google's first Tensor Processing Unit (TPU). Google Cloud Platform https://cloud. google. com/blog/big-data/2017/05/an-in-depth-look-at-googles-first-tensor-processing-unit-tpu (2017).
184. Google. TensorFlowTM www. Tensorflow. org (2017)
185. Rampasek, L. & Goldenberg, A. TensorFlow: biology's gateway to deep learning Cell Syst. 2, 12-14 (2016).
186. Litjens, G. et al. A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med. Image Anal. 42, 60-88 (2017).
187. Holder, L. B., Haque, M. M. & Skinner, M. K. Machine learning for epigenetics and future medical applications. Epigenetics 19, 1-10 (2017).
188. Li, Y., Chen, C. Y. & Wasserman, W. W. Deep feature selection: Theory and application to identify enhancers and promoters. J. Comput. Biol. 23, 322-336 (2016).
189. Erickson, B. J., Korfiatis, P., Akkus, Z., Kline, T. & Philbrick, K. Toolkits and libraries for deep learning. J. Digit. Imag. 30, 400-405 (2017).
190. Gasteiger, J. Physicochemical effects in the representation of molecular structures for drug designing. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 3, 789-796 (2003).
191. Sawada, R., Kotera, M. & Yamanishi, Y. Benchmarking a wide range of chemical descriptors for drug-target interaction prediction using a chemogenomic approach. Mol. Inf. 33, 719-731 (2014).
192. Goh, G. B., Siegel, C., Vishnu, A., Hodas, N. O. & Baker, N. Chemception: A deep neural network with minimal chemistry knowledge matches the performance of expert-developed QSAR/QSPR models. ArXiv, 1706. 06689 (2017).
193. Castelvecchi, D. Can we open the black box of AI Nature 538, 20-23 (2016).
194. Albrecht, T., Slabaugh, G., Alonso, E. & Al-Arif, M. R. Deep learning for single-molecule science. Nanotechnology 28, 423001 (2017).
195. Schneider, G. Neural networks are useful tools for drug design. Neural Netw. 13, 15-16 (2000).
196. Winkler, D. A. & Le, T. C. Performance of deep and shallow neural networks, the universal approximation theorem, activity cliffs, and QSAR. Mol. Inf. 36, 1600118 (2017).
197. Xie, L., Draizen, E. J. & Bourne, P. E. Harnessing big data for systems pharmacology. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 57, 157-160 (2017).
198. Del Sol, A., Thiesen, H. J., Imitola, J. & Carazo Salas, R. E. Big-data-driven stem cell science and tissue engineering: vision and unique opportunities. Cell Stem Cell 20, 157-160 (2017).
199. Schmid, M. & Lipson, H. Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data. Science 324, 81-85 (2009).
200. Ekins, S. The next era: deep learning in pharmaceutical research. Pharm. Res. 33, 2594-2603 (2016).
201. Gawehn, E., Hiss, J. A. & Schneider, G. Deep learning in drug discovery. Mol. Inf. 35, 3-14 (2016).
202. Aliper, A. et al. Deep learning applications for predicting pharmacological properties of drugs and drug repurposing using transcriptomic data. Mol. Pharm. 13, 2524-2530 (2016).
203. Tian, K., Shao, M., Wang, Y., Guan, J. & Zhou, S. Boosting compound-protein interaction prediction by deep learning. Methods 110, 64-72 (2016).
204. Schneider, G. & Schneider, P. Macromolecular target prediction by self-organizing feature maps. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 12, 271-277 (2017).
205. Filzen, T. M., Kutchukian, P. S., Hermes, J. D., Li, J. & Tudor, M. Representing high throughput expression profiles via perturbation barcodes reveals compound targets. PLoS Comput. Biol. 13, e1005335 (2017).
206. Zhang, L., Tan, J., Han, D. & Zhu, H. From machine learning to deep learning: progress in machine intelligence for rational drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today. http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. drudis. 2017. 08. 010 (2017).
207. Zong, N., Kim, H., Ngo, V. & Harismendy, O. Deep mining heterogeneous networks of biomedical linked data to predict novel drug-target associations. Bioinformatics 33, 2337-2344 (2017).
208. Ragoza, M., Hochuli, J., Idrobo, E., Sunseri, J. & Koes, D. R. Protein-ligand scoring with convolutional neural networks. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 57, 942-957 (2017).
209. Pereira, J. C., Caffarena, E. R. & Dos Santos, C. N. Boosting docking-based virtual screening with deep learning. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 56, 2495-2506 (2016).
210. Goh, G. B., Hodas, N. O. & Vishnu, A. Deep learning for computational chemistry. J. Comput. Chem. 38, 1291-1307 (2017).
211. Mamoshina, P., Vieira, A., Putin, E. & Zhavoronkov, A. Applications of deep learning in biomedicine. Mol. Pharm. 13, 1445-1454 (2016).
212. ExCAPE-DB: ExCAPE chemogenomics database. https://solr. ideaconsult. net/search/excape/ (2017).
213. Sun, J. et al. ExCAPE-DB: An integrated large scale dataset facilitating Big Data analysis in chemogenomics. J. Cheminform. 9, 17 (2017).
214. Mondal, K. Design issues of Big Data parallelisms. Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput. 434, 209-217 (2016).
215. Tetko, I. V., Engkvist, O. & Chen, H. Does 'Big Data' exist in medicinal chemistry, and if so, how can it be harnessed Future Med. Chem. 8, 1801-1806 (2016).
216. Tetko, I. V., Engkvist, O., Koch, U., Reymond, J. L. & Chen, H. BIGCHEM: challenges and opportunities for big data analysis in chemistry. Mol. Inf. 35, 615-621 (2016).
217. Ramsundar, B. et al. Is multitask deep learning practical for pharma J. Chem. Inf. Model. 57, 2068-2076 (2017).
218. Mathea, M., Klingspohn, W. & Baumann, K. Chemoinformatic classification methods and their applicability domain. Mol. Inf. 35, 160-180 (2016).
219. Ochi, S., Miyao, T. & Funatsu, K. Structure modification toward applicability domain of a QSAR/ QSPR model considering activity/property. Mol. Inf. http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/minf. 201700076 (2017).
220. Posner, B. A., Xi, H. & Mills, J. E. Enhanced HTS hit selection via a local hit rate analysis. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 49, 2202-2210 (2009).
221. Zhang, L., Boehm, M. & Lovering, F. in ACS National Meeting & Exposition CINF82 (San Francisco, 2017).
222. Sparkes, A. et al. Towards robot scientists for autonomous scientific discovery. Autom. Exp. 2, 1 (2010).
223. Skoraczynski, G. et al. Predicting the outcomes of organic reactions via machine learning: Are current descriptors sufficient Sci. Rep. 7, 3582 (2017).
224. Altae-Tran, H., Ramsundar, B., Pappu, A. S. & Pande, V. Low data drug discovery with one-shot learning. ACS Cent. Sci. 3, 283-293 (2017).
225. Cully, A., Clune, J., Tarapore, D. & Mouret, J. B. Robots that can adapt like animals. Nature 521, 503-507 (2015).
226. Adami, C. Artificial intelligence: robots with instincts. Nature 521, 426-427 (2015).
227. [No authors listed. ] Blogroll: Robot wars. Nat. Chem. 1, 173 (2009).
228. Peplow, M. Organic synthesis: The robo-chemist. Nature 512, 20-22 (2014).
229. Satyanarayanajois, S. D. & Hill, R. A. Medicinal chemistry for 2020. Future Med. Chem. 3, 1765-1786 (2011).
230. Rafferty, M. F. No denying it: medicinal chemistry training is in big trouble. J. Med. Chem. 59, 10859-10864 (2016).
231. Allen, D. Where will we get the next generation of medicinal chemists Drug Discov. Today 21, 704-706 (2016).
232. Tomov, T. E. et al. DNA bipedal motor achieves a large number of steps due to operation using microfluidics-based interface. ACS Nano 11, 4002-4008 (2017).
233. Lehn, J. M. & Eliseev, A. V. Dynamic combinatorial chemistry: evolutionary formation and screening of molecular libraries. Science 291, 2331-2332 (2001).
234. Mondal, M. & Hirsch, A. K. Dynamic combinatorial chemistry. Chem. Soc. Rev. 44, 2455-2488 (2015).
235. Vermesan, O. & Friess, P. Internet of Things-Converging Technologies for Smart Environments and Integrated Ecosystems (River Publishers, 2013).
236. Carroll, G. P., Srivastava, S., Volini, A. S., Piñeiro-Núñez, M. M. & Vetman, T. Measuring the effectiveness and impact of an open innovation platform. Drug Discov. Today 22, 776-785 (2017).
237. Schneider, P. & Schneider, G. De novo design at the edge of chaos. J. Med. Chem. 59, 4077-4086 (2016).
238. Dimova, D., Heikamp, K., Stumpfe, D. & Bajorath, J. Do medicinal chemists learn from activity cliffs A systematic evaluation of cliff progression in evolving compound data sets. J. Med. Chem. 56, 3339-3345 (2013).
239. Munos, B. Lessons from 60 years of pharmaceutical innovation. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 8, 959-968 (2009).
240. Sneddon, H. Embedding sustainable practices into pharmaceutical R&D: what are the challenges Future Med. Chem. 6, 1373-1376 (2014).
241. Djuric, S. W., Hutchins, C. W. & Talaty, N. N. Current status and future prospects for enabling chemistry technology in the drug discovery process. F1000Res 5, 2426 (2016).
242. Scannell, J. W., Blanckley, A., Boldon, H. & Warrington, B. Diagnosing the decline in pharmaceutical R&D efficiency. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 11, 191-200 (2012).
243. Mignani, S., Huber, S., Tomás, H., Rodrigues, J. & Majoral, J. P. Why and how have drug discovery strategies in pharma changed What are the new mindsets Drug Discov. Today 21, 239-249 (2016).
244. Gautam, A. & Pan, X. The changing model of big pharma: impact of key trends. Drug Discov. Today 21, 379-384 (2016).
245. Reutlinger, M. & Schneider, G. Nonlinear dimensionality reduction and mapping of compound libraries for drug discovery. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 34, 108-117 (2012).
246. Hawkes, S. Y. F. W., Chapela, M. J. V. & Montembault, M. Leveraging the advantages offered by microfluidics to enhance the drug discovery process. QSAR Comb. Sci. 24, 712-721 (2005).
247. Werner, M. et al. Seamless integration of dose-response screening and flow chemistry: efficient generation of structure-activity relationship data of-secretase (BACE1) inhibitors. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53, 1704-1708 (2014).
248. Czechtizky, W. et al. Integrated synthesis and testing of substituted xanthine based DPP4 inhibitors: Application to drug discovery. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 4, 768-772 (2013).
249. Pagano, N. et al. An integrated chemical biology approach reveals the mechanism of action of HIV replication inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. http:// dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. bmc. 2017. 03. 061 (2017).