Mechanism-based screening: discovery of the next generation of anthelmintics depends upon more basic research.

The therapeutic arsenal for the control of helminth infections contains only a few chemical classes. The development and spread of resistance has eroded the utility of most currently available anthelmintics, at least for some indications, and is a constant threat to further reduce the options for treatment. Discovery and development of novel anthelmintic templates is strategically necessary to preserve the economic and health advantages now gained through chemotherapy. As the costs of development escalate, the question of how best to discover new drugs becomes paramount. Although random screening in infected animals led to the discovery of all currently available anthelmintics, cost constraints and a perception of diminishing returns require new approaches. Taking a cue from drug discovery programmes for human illnesses, we suggest that mechanism-based screening will provide the next generation of anthelmintic molecules. Critical to success in this venture will be the exploitation of the Caenorhabditis elegans genome through bioinformatics and genetic technologies. The greatest obstacle to success in this endeavour is the paucity of information available about the molecular physiology of helminths, making the choice of a discovery target a risky proposition.

[1]  J G Houston,et al.  The chemical-biological interface: developments in automated and miniaturised screening technology. , 1997, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[2]  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.

[3]  J. Broach,et al.  High-throughput screening for drug discovery. , 1996, Nature.

[4]  Ilkka Hemmilä,et al.  Time-resolved fluorometry: an overview of the labels and core technologies for drug screening applications , 1997 .

[5]  David Harding,et al.  Development of an automated high-throughput screening system : a case history , 1997 .

[6]  M. Blaxter.  The filarial genome network , 1995 .

[7]  J. Boothroyd,et al.  Molecular approaches to parasitology , 1995 .

[8]  S. P. Fodor,et al.  Applications of combinatorial technologies to drug discovery. 2. Combinatorial organic synthesis, library screening strategies, and future directions. , 1994, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  R. Raff,et al.  Evidence for a clade of nematodes, arthropods and other moulting animals , 1997, Nature.

[10]  C. Johnson,et al.  Genetic pharmacology: interactions between drugs and gene products in Caenorhabditis elegans. , 1995, Methods in cell biology.

[11]  T L Blundell,et al.  Protein structure--based drug design. , 1994, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[12]  Postsequence genetics of Caenorhabditis elegans. , 1996, Genome research.

[13]  Gerald C. Coles,et al.  The use ofCaenorhabditis elegansfor anthelmintic screening: C. elegansfor anthelmintic screening , 1981 .

[14]  E. Gordon,et al.  Innovative approaches to novel antibacterial drug discovery. , 1997, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[15]  Ronald D. Klein,et al.  Recombinant Microorganisms as Tools for High Throughput Screening for Nonantibiotic Compounds , 1997 .

[16]  C. H. Price,et al.  The role of receptor binding in drug discovery. , 1993, Journal of natural products.

[17]  M. Pausch,et al.  G-protein-coupled receptors in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: high-throughput screening assays for drug discovery. , 1997, Trends in biotechnology.

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

[19]  D. Kingsbury.  Bioinformatics in drug discovery , 1997 .

[20]  P. Colman,et al.  Structure-based drug design. , 1994, Current opinion in structural biology.

[21]  A. Fire,et al.  Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans , 1998, Nature.

[22]  J M Liesch,et al.  A potent nonpeptide cholecystokinin antagonist selective for peripheral tissues isolated from Aspergillus alliaceus. , 1985, Science.

[23]  F E Cohen,et al.  Structure-based inhibitor design by using protein models for the development of antiparasitic agents. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  A. Goldstein,et al.  Stereospecific and nonspecific interactions of the morphine congener levorphanol in subcellular fractions of mouse brain. , 1971, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  M. Kwa,et al.  Beta-tubulin genes from the parasitic nematode Haemonchus contortus modulate drug resistance in Caenorhabditis elegans. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  Dinesh V. Patel,et al.  Strategy and Tactics in Combinatorial Organic Synthesis. Applications to Drug Discovery , 1996 .

[27]  Michael Williams.  Receptor Binding in the Drug Discovery Process , 1991 .

[28]  I. Kuntz.  Structure-Based Strategies for Drug Design and Discovery , 1992, Science.

[29]  J. Schein,et al.  Interpreting a sequenced genome: toward a cosmid transgenic library of Caenorhabditis elegans. , 1997, Genome Research.

[30]  M. Brownstein.  A brief history of opiates, opioid peptides, and opioid receptors. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  D. P. Thompson,et al.  Prospects for rational approaches to anthelmintic discovery , 1996, Parasitology.

[32]  R. Plasterk,et al.  Reverse genetics: from gene sequence to mutant worm. , 1995, Methods in cell biology.

[33]  W. Janzen,et al.  High-throughput screening: advances in assay technologies. , 1997, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[34]  R. Plasterk,et al.  Target-selected gene inactivation in Caenorhabditis elegans by using a frozen transposon insertion mutant bank. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  W B Wood,et al.  Trimethylpsoralen induces small deletion mutations in Caenorhabditis elegans. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.