The Rise and Fall of a Scaffold: A Trend Analysis of Scaffolds in the Medicinal Chemistry Literature.

Scaffolds are a core concept in medicinal chemistry, and they can be the focus of multiple independent development efforts over an extended period. Thus, scaffold associated properties can vary over time, possibly showing consistently increasing or decreasing trends. We posit that such trends characterize the attention that the community pays to a scaffold. In this study, we employed data from ChEMBL20 to examine the evolution of scaffold features, such as enumerated compounds, biological activity, and liabilities, over 17 years. Our analysis highlights that certain properties such as enumerated compounds, but not liabilities, show statistically significant increasing trends for some scaffolds. We also attempt to explain why a scaffold receives more attention over time and highlight that obvious aspects such as synthetic feasibility do not explicitly drive attention. In summary, trend analyses of scaffold properties could support scaffold selection and prioritization in small molecule development projects.

[1]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Monitoring the Progression of Structure-Activity Relationship Information during Lead Optimization. , 2016, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[2]  J Polanski,et al.  Privileged structures - dream or reality: preferential organization of azanaphthalene scaffold. , 2012, Current medicinal chemistry.

[3]  Gaozhi Chen,et al.  Discovery of new MD2 inhibitor from chalcone derivatives with anti-inflammatory effects in LPS-induced acute lung injury , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[4]  K. F. Morgan,et al.  Oxetanes: Recent Advances in Synthesis, Reactivity, and Medicinal Chemistry. , 2016, Chemical reviews.

[5]  George Papadatos,et al.  The ChEMBL bioactivity database: an update , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[6]  S. Amslinger,et al.  Reactivity assessment of chalcones by a kinetic thiol assay. , 2013, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

[7]  R. Gambari,et al.  Hybrid alpha-bromoacryloylamido chalcones. Design, synthesis and biological evaluation. , 2009, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[8]  Ian A. Watson,et al.  Rules for identifying potentially reactive or promiscuous compounds. , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  G. Bemis,et al.  The properties of known drugs. 1. Molecular frameworks. , 1996, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[10]  Wolfgang G. Stock.  The inflation of impact factors of scientific journals. , 2009, Chemphyschem : a European journal of chemical physics and physical chemistry.

[11]  D. Christakis,et al.  Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? , 2003, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[12]  Varun Khanna,et al.  Structural diversity of biologically interesting datasets: a scaffold analysis approach , 2011, J. Cheminformatics.

[13]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Systematic Identification of Scaffolds Representing Compounds Active against Individual Targets and Single or Multiple Target Families , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[14]  Jayme L. Dahlin,et al.  How to Triage PAINS-Full Research. , 2016, Assay and drug development technologies.

[15]  Andrew I Su,et al.  HierS: hierarchical scaffold clustering using topological chemical graphs. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[16]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  A comprehensive map of molecular drug targets , 2016, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[17]  Jun Li,et al.  Current complexity: a tool for assessing the complexity of organic molecules. , 2015, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

[18]  George Papadatos,et al.  SureChEMBL: a large-scale, chemically annotated patent document database , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

[19]  S. Ganguly,et al.  Structure activity relationship (SAR) study of benzimidazole scaffold for different biological activities: A mini-review. , 2015, European journal of medicinal chemistry.

[20]  W. Patrick Walters,et al.  A guide to drug discovery: Designing screens: how to make your hits a hit , 2003, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[21]  N. Lawrence,et al.  Combretastatin-like chalcones as inhibitors of microtubule polymerization. Part 1: synthesis and biological evaluation of antivascular activity. , 2009, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[22]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Computational Exploration of Molecular Scaffolds in Medicinal Chemistry. , 2016, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[23]  Matthew E Welsch,et al.  Privileged scaffolds for library design and drug discovery. , 2010, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[24]  Barbara Zdrazil,et al.  Transporter assays and assay ontologies: useful tools for drug discovery. , 2014, Drug discovery today. Technologies.

[25]  Hugo Kubinyi,et al.  Privileged Structures and Analogue‐Based Drug Discovery , 2006 .

[26]  Barbara Zdrazil,et al.  From linked open data to molecular interaction: studying selectivity trends for ligands of the human serotonin and dopamine transporter , 2016, MedChemComm.

[27]  C. Klein,et al.  Promiscuity and selectivity in covalent enzyme inhibition: a systematic study of electrophilic fragments. , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[28]  Gary D Bader,et al.  The human genome and drug discovery after a decade. Roads (still) not taken , 2011, 1102.0448.

[29]  R. Merton.  The Matthew Effect in Science , 1968, Science.

[30]  P. Seglen,et al.  Education and debate , 1999, The Ethics of Public Health.

[31]  Wenmin Liu,et al.  Characterization of Chalcones from Medicago sativa L. and Their Hypolipidemic and Antiangiogenic Activities. , 2016, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[32]  A. Schuffenhauer,et al.  Charting biologically relevant chemical space: a structural classification of natural products (SCONP). , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  Vincent Larivière,et al.  A simple proposal for the publication of journal citation distributions , 2016, bioRxiv.

[34]  Nathan Brown,et al.  Applications of Systematic Molecular Scaffold Enumeration to Enrich Structure–Activity Relationship Information , 2017, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[35]  Thorsten Meinl,et al.  KNIME: The Konstanz Information Miner , 2007, GfKl.

[36]  Scott E. Martin,et al.  Reproducible pharmacogenomic profiling of cancer cell line panels , 2016, Nature.

[37]  Asher Mullard,et al.  The phenotypic screening pendulum swings , 2015, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[38]  B. Cravatt,et al.  Disparate proteome reactivity profiles of carbon electrophiles. , 2008, Nature chemical biology.

[39]  Alexander Tropsha,et al.  Phantom PAINS: Problems with the Utility of Alerts for Pan-Assay INterference CompoundS , 2017, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[40]  S. N. Bukhari,et al.  Effects of chalcone derivatives on players of the immune system , 2015, Drug design, development and therapy.

[41]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Target Family-Directed Exploration of Scaffolds with Different SAR Profiles , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[42]  Mark Johnson,et al.  Using Molecular Equivalence Numbers To Visually Explore Structural Features that Distinguish Chemical Libraries , 2002, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[43]  John P. Overington,et al.  ChEMBL: a large-scale bioactivity database for drug discovery , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[44]  Rainer Breitling,et al.  Rank products: a simple, yet powerful, new method to detect differentially regulated genes in replicated microarray experiments , 2004, FEBS letters.

[45]  M. R. Senger,et al.  Filtering promiscuous compounds in early drug discovery: is it a good idea? , 2016, Drug discovery today.

[46]  Jonas Boström,et al.  Understanding our love affair with p-chlorophenyl: present day implications from historical biases of reagent selection. , 2015, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[47]  Anang A Shelat,et al.  Scaffold composition and biological relevance of screening libraries. , 2007, Nature chemical biology.

[48]  Debarshi Kar Mahapatra,et al.  Therapeutic potential of chalcones as cardiovascular agents. , 2016, Life sciences.

[49]  Sorel Muresan,et al.  Analysis of in vitro bioactivity data extracted from drug discovery literature and patents: Ranking 1654 human protein targets by assayed compounds and molecular scaffolds , 2011, J. Cheminformatics.

[50]  Sarah R. Langdon,et al.  Scaffold Diversity of Exemplified Medicinal Chemistry Space , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[51]  Srinivasa Rao Atla,et al.  A study of anti-inflammatory and analgesic activity of new 2,4,6-trisubstituted pyrimidines. , 2011, Chemical & pharmaceutical bulletin.

[52]  B. E. Evans,et al.  Methods for drug discovery: development of potent, selective, orally effective cholecystokinin antagonists. , 1988, Journal of Medicinal Chemistry.

[53]  Barbara Zdrazil,et al.  Annotating Human P-Glycoprotein Bioassay Data , 2012, Molecular informatics.

[54]  J. Baell,et al.  New substructure filters for removal of pan assay interference compounds (PAINS) from screening libraries and for their exclusion in bioassays. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[55]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Systematic analysis of public domain compound potency data identifies selective molecular scaffolds across druggable target families. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[56]  B. Feringa,et al.  Catalytic direct cross-coupling of organolithium compounds with aryl chlorides. , 2013, Organic letters.

[57]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Assessing the Growth of Bioactive Compounds and Scaffolds over Time: Implications for Lead Discovery and Scaffold Hopping , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[58]  Hongyu Zhao,et al.  Privileged scaffolds in lead generation , 2015, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[59]  Vivek Asati,et al.  Anti-cancer chalcones: Structural and molecular target perspectives. , 2015, European journal of medicinal chemistry.