Chemogenomics approaches for receptor deorphanization and extensions of the chemogenomics concept to phenotypic space.

Chemogenomic approaches, which link ligand chemistry to bioactivity against targets (and, by extension, to phenotypes) are becoming more and more important due to the increasing number of bioactivity data available both in proprietary databases as well as in the public domain. In this article we review chemogenomics approaches applied in four different domains: Firstly, due to the relationship between protein targets from which an approximate relation between their respective bioactive ligands can be inferred, we investigate the extent to which chemogenomics approaches can be applied to receptor deorphanization. In this case it was found that by using knowledge about active compounds of related proteins, in 93% of all cases enrichment better than random could be obtained. Secondly, we analyze different cheminformatics analysis methods with respect to their behavior in chemogenomics studies, such as subgraph mining and Bayesian models. Thirdly, we illustrate how chemogenomics, in its particular flavor of 'proteochemometrics', can be applied to extrapolate bioactivity predictions from given data points to related targets. Finally, we extend the concept of 'chemogenomics' approaches, relating ligand chemistry to bioactivity against related targets, into phenotypic space which then falls into the area of 'chemical genomics' and 'chemical genetics'; given that this is very often the desired endpoint of approaches in not only the pharmaceutical industry, but also in academic probe discovery, this is often the endpoint the experimental scientist is most interested in.

[1]  Wolfgang Guba,et al.  Development of a virtual screening method for identification of "frequent hitters" in compound libraries. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[2]  Shane Weaver,et al.  The importance of the domain of applicability in QSAR modeling. , 2008, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[3]  Gavin Harper,et al.  Assessment of chemical coverage of kinome space and its implications for kinase drug discovery. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  Igor V. Tetko,et al.  Critical Assessment of QSAR Models of Environmental Toxicity against Tetrahymena pyriformis: Focusing on Applicability Domain and Overfitting by Variable Selection , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[5]  D. Gloriam,et al.  Definition of the G protein-coupled receptor transmembrane bundle binding pocket and calculation of receptor similarities for drug design. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[6]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  Substructure Mining Using Elaborate Chemical Representation , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[7]  Andreas Bender,et al.  A Discussion of Measures of Enrichment in Virtual Screening: Comparing the Information Content of Descriptors with Increasing Levels of Sophistication , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  T. Lundstedt,et al.  Development of proteo-chemometrics: a novel technology for the analysis of drug-receptor interactions. , 2001, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[9]  Jean-Philippe Vert,et al.  Virtual screening of GPCRs: An in silico chemogenomics approach , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[10]  R. Solé,et al.  The topology of drug-target interaction networks: implicit dependence on drug properties and target families. , 2009, Molecular bioSystems.

[11]  Julio E. Peironcely,et al.  Chemogenomics: Looking at biology through the lens of chemistry , 2009 .

[12]  Andreas Bender,et al.  How Similar Are Similarity Searching Methods? A Principal Component Analysis of Molecular Descriptor Space , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[13]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Databases: Compound bioactivities go public , 2010 .

[14]  Xin Wen,et al.  BindingDB: a web-accessible database of experimentally determined protein–ligand binding affinities , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[15]  T. Klabunde Chemogenomic approaches to drug discovery: similar receptors bind similar ligands , 2007, British journal of pharmacology.

[16]  Didier Rognan,et al.  A chemogenomic analysis of the transmembrane binding cavity of human G‐protein‐coupled receptors , 2005, Proteins.

[17]  William P. Janzen,et al.  A Chemogenomic Analysis of the Human Proteome: Application to Enzyme Families , 2007, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[18]  R. Solé,et al.  Data completeness—the Achilles heel of drug-target networks , 2008, Nature Biotechnology.

[19]  Oliver Ebenhöh,et al.  Ground State Robustness as an Evolutionary Design Principle in Signaling Networks , 2009, PloS one.

[20]  H Kubinyi,et al.  Chance favors the prepared mind--from serendipity to rational drug design. , 1999, Journal of receptor and signal transduction research.

[21]  P. Bork,et al.  A side effect resource to capture phenotypic effects of drugs , 2010, Molecular systems biology.

[22]  E. Jacoby,et al.  Chemogenomic strategies to expand the bioactive chemical space. , 2009, Current medicinal chemistry.

[23]  J. Kazius,et al.  Derivation and validation of toxicophores for mutagenicity prediction. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[24]  T. Lundstedt,et al.  Proteochemometrics modeling of the interaction of amine G-protein coupled receptors with a diverse set of ligands. , 2002, Molecular pharmacology.

[25]  A. Bender,et al.  Cover Picture: Analysis of Pharmacology Data and the Prediction of Adverse Drug Reactions and Off-Target Effects from Chemical Structure (ChemMedChem 6/2007) , 2007 .

[26]  M. Murcko,et al.  Chemogenomic approaches to drug discovery. , 2001, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[27]  A. Bender,et al.  In silico target fishing: Predicting biological targets from chemical structure , 2006 .

[28]  K. Fidelis,et al.  Interaction Model Based on Local Protein Substructures Generalizes to the Entire Structural Enzyme‐Ligand Space. , 2009 .

[29]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Machine learning models for lipophilicity and their domain of applicability. , 2007, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[30]  R. Glen,et al.  Molecular similarity: a key technique in molecular informatics. , 2004, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

[31]  John A. Tallarico,et al.  Multi-parameter phenotypic profiling: using cellular effects to characterize small-molecule compounds , 2009, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[32]  G. V. Paolini,et al.  Global mapping of pharmacological space , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[33]  Michael T. M. Emmerich,et al.  A novel chemogenomics analysis of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and their ligands: a potential strategy for receptor de-orphanization , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[34]  John A. Tallarico,et al.  Integrating high-content screening and ligand-target prediction to identify mechanism of action. , 2008, Nature chemical biology.

[35]  Joseph Lehar,et al.  Therapeutic selectivity and the multi-node drug target. , 2009, Discovery medicine.

[36]  Michael T. M. Emmerich,et al.  Chemogenomics: Looking at biology through the lens of chemistry , 2009, Stat. Anal. Data Min..

[37]  Richard Morphy,et al.  Designed Multiple Ligands. An Emerging Drug Discovery Paradigm , 2006 .

[38]  A. Fliri,et al.  Analysis of drug-induced effect patterns to link structure and side effects of medicines , 2005, Nature chemical biology.

[39]  Adriaan P. IJzerman,et al.  Substructure Mining of GPCR Ligands Reveals Activity-Class Specific Functional Groups in an Unbiased Manner , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[40]  E. Maréchal Chemogenomics: a discipline at the crossroad of high throughput technologies, biomarker research, combinatorial chemistry, genomics, cheminformatics, bioinformatics and artificial intelligence. , 2008, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[41]  Anthony J Williams,et al.  Public chemical compound databases. , 2008, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[42]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Computational methods to support high-content screening: from compound selection and data analysis to postulating target hypotheses , 2009, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[43]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Diversity-Oriented Synthesis: A Spectrum of Approaches and Results , 2008 .

[44]  B. Stockwell Chemical genetics: ligand-based discovery of gene function , 2000, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[45]  J. Lehár,et al.  Synergistic drug combinations improve therapeutic selectivity , 2009, Nature Biotechnology.

[46]  P. Clemons,et al.  Chemogenomic data analysis: prediction of small-molecule targets and the advent of biological fingerprint. , 2007, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[47]  Nathanael Weill,et al.  Development and Validation of a Novel Protein-Ligand Fingerprint To Mine Chemogenomic Space: Application to G Protein-Coupled Receptors and Their Ligands , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[48]  D. Spring Chemical Genetics to Chemical Genomics: Small Molecules Offer Big Insights , 2005 .

[49]  D. Rognan Chemogenomic approaches to rational drug design , 2007, British journal of pharmacology.

[50]  Bryan L Roth,et al.  Screening the receptorome to discover the molecular targets for plant-derived psychoactive compounds: a novel approach for CNS drug discovery. , 2004, Pharmacology & therapeutics.

[51]  Corey Nislow,et al.  Combination chemical genetics. , 2008, Nature chemical biology.

[52]  Bernhard Kuster,et al.  Quantitative chemical proteomics reveals mechanisms of action of clinical ABL kinase inhibitors , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[53]  H. Kitano A robustness-based approach to systems-oriented drug design , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[54]  David M. Rocke,et al.  Predicting ligand binding to proteins by affinity fingerprinting. , 1995, Chemistry & biology.

[55]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Understanding False Positives in Reporter Gene Assays: in Silico Chemogenomics Approaches To Prioritize Cell-Based HTS Data , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[56]  C. Sander,et al.  Models from experiments: combinatorial drug perturbations of cancer cells , 2008, Molecular systems biology.

[57]  M. Vieth,et al.  Kinomics-structural biology and chemogenomics of kinase inhibitors and targets. , 2004, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[58]  J. Mestres,et al.  A ligand-based approach to mining the chemogenomic space of drugs. , 2008, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[59]  U. Lessel,et al.  In vitro and in silico affinity fingerprints: Finding similarities beyond structural classes , 2000 .

[60]  E. Jacoby,et al.  Chemogenomics: an emerging strategy for rapid target and drug discovery , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[61]  Jordi Mestres,et al.  Computational chemogenomics approaches to systematic knowledge-based drug discovery. , 2004, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[62]  Xiaohua Ma,et al.  Mechanisms of drug combinations: interaction and network perspectives , 2009, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[63]  Jean-Loup Faulon,et al.  Genome scale enzyme–metabolite and drug–target interaction predictions using the signature molecular descriptor , 2008 .

[64]  Pierre Acklin,et al.  Similarity Metrics for Ligands Reflecting the Similarity of the Target Proteins , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[65]  David A. Gough,et al.  Virtual Screen for Ligands of Orphan G Protein-Coupled Receptors , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[66]  Horvath Dragos,et al.  Predicting the predictability: a unified approach to the applicability domain problem of QSAR models. , 2009, Journal of chemical information and modeling.

[67]  Gerard J. P. van Westen,et al.  Proteochemometric modeling as a tool to design selective compounds and for extrapolating to novel targets , 2011 .

[68]  Z. Deng,et al.  Bridging chemical and biological space: "target fishing" using 2D and 3D molecular descriptors. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[69]  A. Bender,et al.  Assessment of structural diversity in combinatorial synthesis. , 2005, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[70]  David Rogers,et al.  Extended-Connectivity Fingerprints , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[71]  Péter Csermely,et al.  The efficiency of multi-target drugs: the network approach might help drug design. , 2004, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[72]  P. Bork,et al.  Drug Target Identification Using Side-Effect Similarity , 2008, Science.

[73]  David S. Wishart,et al.  DrugBank: a comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[74]  E. Jacoby A Novel Chemogenomics Knowledge-Based Ligand Design Strategy—Application to G Protein-Coupled Receptors , 2001 .

[75]  Mindy I. Davis,et al.  A quantitative analysis of kinase inhibitor selectivity , 2008, Nature Biotechnology.

[76]  Michael J. Keiser,et al.  Relating protein pharmacology by ligand chemistry , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[77]  A. Bender,et al.  Analysis of Pharmacology Data and the Prediction of Adverse Drug Reactions and Off‐Target Effects from Chemical Structure , 2007, ChemMedChem.

[78]  Andreas Bender,et al.  "Bayes Affinity Fingerprints" Improve Retrieval Rates in Virtual Screening and Define Orthogonal Bioactivity Space: When Are Multitarget Drugs a Feasible Concept? , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..