Lead generation and examples opinion regarding how to follow up hits.

In fragment-based drug discovery (FBDD), not only identifying the starting fragment hit to be developed but also generating a drug lead from that starting fragment hit is important. Converting fragment hits to leads is generally similar to a high-throughput screening (HTS) hits-to-leads approach in that properties associated with activity for a target protein, such as selectivity against other targets and absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity (ADME/Tox), and physicochemical properties should be taken into account. However, enhancing the potency of the fragment hit is a key requirement in FBDD, unlike HTS, because initial fragment hits are generally weak. This enhancement is presently achieved by adding additional chemical groups which bind to additional parts of the target protein or by joining or combining two or more hit fragments; however, strategies for effecting greater improvements in effective activity are needed. X-ray analysis is a key technology attractive for converting fragments to drug leads. This method makes it clear whether a fragment hit can act as an anchor and provides insight regarding introduction of functional groups to improve fragment activity. Data on follow-up chemical synthesis of fragment hits has allowed for the differentiation of four different strategies: fragment optimization, fragment linking, fragment self-assembly, and fragment evolution. Here, we discuss our opinion regarding how to follow up on fragment hits, with a focus on the importance of fragment hits as an anchor moiety to so-called hot spots in the target protein using crystallographic data.

[1]  D. Baker,et al.  A simple physical model for binding energy hot spots in protein–protein complexes , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  S. Bembenek,et al.  Ligand binding efficiency: trends, physical basis, and implications. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[3]  H. Kolb,et al.  The growing impact of click chemistry on drug discovery. , 2003, Drug discovery today.

[4]  D. Erlanson Fragment-based lead discovery: a chemical update. , 2006, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[5]  P. Hajduk,et al.  Druggability indices for protein targets derived from NMR-based screening data. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[6]  Robert Abel,et al.  Motifs for molecular recognition exploiting hydrophobic enclosure in protein–ligand binding , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  P. Taylor,et al.  Click chemistry in situ: acetylcholinesterase as a reaction vessel for the selective assembly of a femtomolar inhibitor from an array of building blocks. , 2002, Angewandte Chemie.

[8]  Dima Kozakov,et al.  Detection of ligand binding hot spots on protein surfaces via fragment-based methods: application to DJ-1 and glucocerebrosidase , 2009, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[9]  W. Jencks,et al.  Entropic contributions to rate accelerations in enzymic and intramolecular reactions and the chelate effect. , 1971, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  J. Lehn,et al.  Virtual combinatorial libraries: dynamic generation of molecular and supramolecular diversity by self-assembly. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. , 2001, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[12]  György M Keseru,et al.  Hit discovery and hit-to-lead approaches. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[13]  P. Hajduk Fragment-based drug design: how big is too big? , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[14]  B. Berne,et al.  Role of the active-site solvent in the thermodynamics of factor Xa ligand binding. , 2008, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[15]  Kristina Luthman,et al.  Polar Molecular Surface Properties Predict the Intestinal Absorption of Drugs in Humans , 1997, Pharmaceutical Research.

[16]  Gennady M Verkhivker,et al.  Unraveling principles of lead discovery: from unfrustrated energy landscapes to novel molecular anchors. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  W. Jencks,et al.  On the attribution and additivity of binding energies. , 1981, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  Brett A Tounge,et al.  The role of molecular size in ligand efficiency. , 2007, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[19]  A. Hopkins,et al.  Ligand efficiency: a useful metric for lead selection. , 2004, Drug discovery today.

[20]  Irini Akritopoulou-Zanze,et al.  Kinase-targeted libraries: the design and synthesis of novel, potent, and selective kinase inhibitors. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[21]  Olof Ramström,et al.  Drug discovery by dynamic combinatorial libraries , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[22]  J. Willem M. Nissink,et al.  Simple Size-Independent Measure of Ligand Efficiency , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[23]  J. T. Metz,et al.  Ligand efficiency indices as guideposts for drug discovery. , 2005, Drug discovery today.

[24]  Marcel L. Verdonk,et al.  The consequences of translational and rotational entropy lost by small molecules on binding to proteins , 2002, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[25]  Sandor Vajda,et al.  Identification of hot spots within druggable binding regions by computational solvent mapping of proteins. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[26]  W. Delano Unraveling hot spots in binding interfaces: progress and challenges. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[27]  Jean-Marie Lehn,et al.  Dynamic Combinatorial Chemistry and Virtual Combinatorial Libraries , 1999 .

[28]  Woody Sherman,et al.  High‐energy water sites determine peptide binding affinity and specificity of PDZ domains , 2009, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[29]  Alexander A Alex,et al.  Fragment-based drug discovery: what has it achieved so far? , 2007, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[30]  I. Kuntz,et al.  The maximal affinity of ligands. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  M. Randal,et al.  Potent small-molecule binding to a dynamic hot spot on IL-2. , 2003, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[32]  T. Blundell,et al.  Probing hot spots at protein-ligand binding sites: a fragment-based approach using biophysical methods. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  Xiaoling Xie,et al.  Flipped out: structure-guided design of selective pyrazolylpyrrole ERK inhibitors. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[34]  T Niimi,et al.  Design and synthesis of non-peptidic inhibitors for the Syk C-terminal SH2 domain based on structure-based in-silico screening. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[35]  Kazuki Ohno,et al.  Two 'Golden Ratio' indices in fragment-based drug discovery. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[36]  Claudio Luchinat,et al.  Entropic contribution to the linking coefficient in fragment based drug design: a case study. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[37]  Masaya Orita,et al.  Advances in fragment-based drug discovery platforms , 2009, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[38]  P. Leeson,et al.  The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[39]  Michelle R. Arkin,et al.  Small-molecule inhibitors of protein–protein interactions: progressing towards the dream , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[40]  P. Selzer,et al.  Fast calculation of molecular polar surface area as a sum of fragment-based contributions and its application to the prediction of drug transport properties. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[41]  P. Hajduk,et al.  Discovering High-Affinity Ligands for Proteins: SAR by NMR , 1996, Science.

[42]  György M. Keserü,et al.  The influence of lead discovery strategies on the properties of drug candidates , 2009, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[43]  A V Eliseev,et al.  Dynamic Combinatorial Chemistry , 2001, Science.

[44]  M. Congreve,et al.  Fragment-based lead discovery , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[45]  M. G. Finn,et al.  Click Chemistry: Diverse Chemical Function from a Few Good Reactions. , 2001, Angewandte Chemie.