X-ray-Structure-Based Identification of Compounds with Activity against Targets from Different Families and Generation of Templates for Multitarget Ligand Design

Compounds with multitarget activity (promiscuity) are increasingly sought in drug discovery. However, promiscuous compounds are often viewed controversially in light of potential assay artifacts that may give rise to false-positive activity annotations. We have reasoned that the strongest evidence for true multitarget activity of small molecules would be provided by experimentally determined structures of ligand–target complexes. Therefore, we have carried out a systematic search of currently available X-ray structures for compounds forming complexes with different targets. Rather unexpectedly, 1418 such crystallographic ligands were identified, including 702 that formed complexes with targets from different protein families (multifamily ligands). About half of these multifamily ligands originated from the medicinal chemistry literature, making it possible to consider additional target annotations and search for analogues. From 168 distinct series of analogues containing one or more multifamily ligands, 133 unique analogue-series-based scaffolds were isolated that can serve as templates for the design of new compounds with multitarget activity. As a part of our study, all of the multifamily ligands we have identified and the analogue-series-based scaffolds are made freely available.

[1]  Chung-Eun Ha,et al.  Structural basis of albumin–thyroxine interactions and familial dysalbuminemic hyperthyroxinemia , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[3]  Kenneth M Merz,et al.  The Ecstasy and Agony of Assay Interference Compounds. , 2017, ACS chemical neuroscience.

[4]  Zukang Feng,et al.  Ligand Depot: a data warehouse for ligands bound to macromolecules , 2004, Bioinform..

[5]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Polypharmacology: challenges and opportunities in drug discovery. , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[6]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Analog series-based scaffolds: computational design and exploration of a new type of molecular scaffolds for medicinal chemistry , 2016, Future science OA.

[7]  Cathy H. Wu,et al.  UniProt: the Universal Protein knowledgebase , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[8]  J. Baell,et al.  Chemistry: Chemical con artists foil drug discovery , 2014, Nature.

[9]  Michael M. Hann,et al.  RECAP — Retrosynthetic Combinatorial Analysis Procedure: A Powerful New Technique for Identifying Privileged Molecular Fragments with Useful Applications in Combinatorial Chemistry. , 1998 .

[10]  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.

[11]  M. Rosini,et al.  Polypharmacology: the rise of multitarget drugs over combination therapies. , 2014, Future medicinal chemistry.

[12]  J. Ruland,et al.  Structural analysis of phenothiazine derivatives as allosteric inhibitors of the MALT1 paracaspase. , 2013, Angewandte Chemie.

[13]  M. Lilly,et al.  Characterization of a potent and selective small-molecule inhibitor of the PIM1 kinase , 2007, Molecular Cancer Therapeutics.

[14]  Daniel J. Warner,et al.  Matched molecular pairs as a medicinal chemistry tool. , 2011, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[15]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Computational design of new molecular scaffolds for medicinal chemistry, part II: generalization of analog series-based scaffolds , 2017, Future science OA.

[16]  M. Romão,et al.  Structural insights into xenobiotic and inhibitor binding to human aldehyde oxidase. , 2015, Nature chemical biology.

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

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

[19]  Paul Webb,et al.  Thyroxine-Thyroid Hormone Receptor Interactions* , 2004, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[20]  B. Shoichet Screening in a spirit haunted world. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[21]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Highly Promiscuous Small Molecules from Biological Screening Assays Include Many Pan-Assay Interference Compounds but Also Candidates for Polypharmacology. , 2016, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  J. Lehár,et al.  Multi-target therapeutics: when the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. , 2007, Drug discovery today.

[23]  Jameed Hussain,et al.  Computationally Efficient Algorithm to Identify Matched Molecular Pairs (MMPs) in Large Data Sets , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[24]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Matched molecular pairs derived by retrosynthetic fragmentation , 2014 .

[25]  Jin-jian Lu,et al.  Multi-Target Drugs: The Trend of Drug Research and Development , 2012, PloS one.

[26]  M L Bolognesi,et al.  Polypharmacology in a single drug: multitarget drugs. , 2013, Current medicinal chemistry.

[27]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Computational Method for the Systematic Identification of Analog Series and Key Compounds Representing Series and Their Biological Activity Profiles. , 2016, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[29]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  How Frequently Are Pan-Assay Interference Compounds Active? Large-Scale Analysis of Screening Data Reveals Diverse Activity Profiles, Low Global Hit Frequency, and Many Consistently Inactive Compounds. , 2017, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[30]  S. Withers,et al.  Order and disorder: differential structural impacts of myricetin and ethyl caffeate on human amylase, an antidiabetic target. , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[31]  W. Geldenhuys,et al.  Designing drugs with multi-target activity: the next step in the treatment of neurodegenerative disorders , 2013, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[32]  A. Cavalli,et al.  Multitarget Drug Discovery and Polypharmacology , 2016, ChemMedChem.

[33]  B. Shoichet,et al.  A common mechanism underlying promiscuous inhibitors from virtual and high-throughput screening. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[34]  K. Shokat,et al.  Targeting the cancer kinome through polypharmacology , 2010, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[35]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Compound promiscuity: what can we learn from current data? , 2013, Drug discovery today.

[36]  David Weininger,et al.  SMILES, a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to methodology and encoding rules , 1988, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..