Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T17:17:04.338Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Computational approaches to drug target identification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2016

Thomas B. Freeman
Affiliation:
Capella Biosciences, Inc
Pek Lum
Affiliation:
Capella Biosciences, Inc
William T. Loging
Affiliation:
Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York
Get access

Summary

Introduction/overview

In this overview we will examine drug target identification, a key early step in the drug discovery and development process and a significant and interesting challenge. Today, target identification is akin to solving a very difficult puzzle using all of the information that we can generate or have available to identify those points of intervention within a highly interconnected dynamic system that will improve a disease state. I see our current approaches as surrogates for a true understanding of the molecular basis of disease, which when achieved should clearly reveal points for therapeutic intervention. Before we attempt to discuss methods used for target identification, we will begin by exploring what a target is and what hurdles a potential target must overcome to be successfully “drugged.” We will examine how the targets from currently approved drugs have been elucidated. A brief historical perspective on target identification will focus on how advances in our understanding of biology have driven our progress. Finally, we will review current directions in selecting drug targets and in understanding disease in an integrated and multi-scale manner.

Drug development is a long and intricate process but one that is quite predictable. The development of a drug usually begins with the selection of a molecular target for modulation by a small molecule or biological compound with the goal of safely improving a disease phenotype. The target concept can be logically extended to include plant biology and perhaps synthetic biology. Crop improvement by increasing yield, quality (i.e., amino acid composition), and insect or drought resistance require identification of points for molecular intervention to bring about the desired phenotype. Similarly, synthetic biology projects require the manipulation of existing biological systems or ultimately creation of modified biological systems, and require a very high level understanding of the genetic and molecular processes involved in producing the desired outcome without destabilizing the system. Our review here will focus on target identification for the purpose of drug discovery and development to address unmet medical need.

Drug discovery research is performed at many levels: in the pharmaceutical industry, in biotechnology companies, government laboratories, research foundations, increasingly in computation-based companies, and even larger generic drug companies. In terms of dollars and number of drugs approved, the pharmaceutical industry has been the largest sector in drug discovery to date.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrowsmith, J.Trial watch: Phase III and submission failures: 2007–2010. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2011a;10:87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arrowsmith, J.Trial watch: Phase II failures: 2008–2010. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2011b;10:328–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basso, K., Margolin, A. A., Stolovitzky, G., et al. Reverse engineering of regulatory networks in human B cells. Nature Genetics. 2005;37:382–390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berthier, C. C., Bethunaickan, R., Gonzalez-Rivera, T., et al. Cross-species transcriptional network analysis defines shared inflammatory responses in murine and human lupus nephritis. Journal of Immunology. 2012;189:988–1001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bleicher, K. H., Böhm, H.-.J, Müller, K. and Alanine, A. I. Hit and lead generation: Beyond high-throughput screening. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2003;2:369–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Califano, A., Butte, A. J., Friend, S., Ideker, T. and Schadt, E. Leveraging models of cell regulation and GWAS data in integrative network-based association studies. Nature Genetics. 2012;44: 841–847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campillos, M., Kuhn, M., Gavin, A.-C., Jensen, L. J. and Bork, P.Drug target identification using side-effect similarity. Science. 2008;321:263–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, Y., Zhu, J., Lum, P. Y., et al. Variations in DNA elucidate molecular networks that cause disease. Nature. 2008;452:429–435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chiang, A. P. and Butte, A. J. Data-driven methods to discover molecular determinants of serious adverse drug events. Clinical and Pharmacological Therapeutics. 2009;85:259–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, H. F., Gurney, A. L., Abaya, E., et al. The secreted protein discovery iniative (SPDI), a large-scale effort to identify novel human secreted and transmembrane proteins: A bioinformatics approach. Genome Research. 2003;13:2265–2270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drews, J.Drug discovery: A historical perspective. Science 2000;287:1960–1964.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drews, J. and Ryser, S.The role of innovation in drug development. Nature Biotechnology. 1997;15:1318–1319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emilsson, V., Thorleifsson, G., Zhang, B., et al. Genetics of gene expression and its effects on disease. Nature. 2008;452:423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, A., Isserlin, R., Bader, G. D., et al. Too many roads not taken. Nature. 2011;470:163–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fliri, A. J., Loging, W. T., Thadeio, P. F. and Volkmann, R. A.Biospectra analysis: Model proteome characterizations for linking molecular structure and biological response. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 2005a;48:6918–6925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fliri, A. J., Loging, W. T., Thadeio, P. F. and Volkmann, R. A.Analysis of drug-induced effect patterns to link structure and side effects of medicines. Nature Chemical Biology. 2005b;1:389–397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fliri, A. J., Loging, W. T. and Volkmann, R. A.Analysis of system structure–function relationships. ChemMedChem. 2007;2:1774–1782.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fliri, A. J., Loging, W. T. and Volkmann, R. A.Drug effects viewed from a signal transduction network perspective. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 2009;52:8038–8046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fliri, A. J., Loging, W. T. and Volkmann, R. A.Cause–effect relationships in medicine: A protein network perspective. Trends in Pharmaceutical Science. 2010;31:547–555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forrest, M. J., Bloomfield, D., Briscoe, R. J., et al. Torcetrapib-induced blood pressure elevation is independent of CETP inhibition and is accompanied by increased circulating levels of aldosterone. British Journal of Pharmacology. 2008;154:1465–1473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodgin, J. B., Nair, V., Zhang, H., et al. Identification of cross-species shared transcriptional networks of diabetic nephropathy in human and mouse glomeruli. Diabetes. 2013;62:299–308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inazu, A., Brown, M. L., Hesler, C. B., et al. Increased high-density lipoprotein levels caused by common cholesterol-ester transfer protein gene mutation. New England Journal of Medicine. 1990;323:1234–1238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keller, M. P., Choi, Y., Wang, P., et al. A gene expression network model of type 2 diabetes links cell cycle regulation in islet with diabetes susceptibility. Genome Research. 2008;18:706–716.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidd, B. A., Peters, L. A., Schadt, E. E. and Dudley, J. T. Unifying immunology with informatics and multiscale biology. Nature Immunology. 2014;15:118–127.Google ScholarPubMed
Krejsa, C. M., Horvath, D., Rogalski, S. L., et al. Predicting ADME properties and side effects: The bioprint approach. Current Opinion in Drug Discovery and Development. 2003;6:470–480.Google ScholarPubMed
Lamb, J.The connectivity map: A new tool for biomedical research. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2007;7:54–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lamb, J., Crawford, E. D., Peck, D., et al. The connectivity map: Using gene-expression signatures to connect small molecules, genes and disease. Science. 2006;313:1929–1935.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loging, W., Rodriguez-Estaban, R., Hill, J., Freeman, T. and Miglietta, J.Cheminformatic/bioinformatic analysis of large corporate databases: Application to drug repurposing. Drug Discovery Today: Therapeutic Strategies. 2011;8:109–116.Google Scholar
López-Muñoz, F., Alamo, C., Cuenca, E., et al. History of the discovery and clinical introduction of chlorpromazine. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry. 2005;17:113–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lum, P. Y., Armour, C. D., Stepaniants, S. B., et al. Discovering modes of action for therapeutic compounds using a genome-wide screen of yeast heterozygotes. Cell. 2004;116:121–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lum, P. Y., Chen, Y., Zhu, J., et al. Elucidating the murine brain transcriptional network in a segregating mouse population to identify core functional modules for obesity and diabetes. Journal of Neurochemistry. 2006;97(Suppl 1):50–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lum, P. Y., Singh, G., Lehman, A., et al. Extracting insights from the shape of complex data using topology. Scientific Reports. 2013;3:1236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morabia, A., Cayanis, E., Costanza, M. C., et al. Association of extreme blood lipid profile phenotypic variation with 11 reverse cholesterol transport genes and 10 non-genetic cardiovascular disease risk factors. Human Molecular Genetics. 2003;12:2733–2743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munos, B. Lessons from 60 years of pharmaceutical innovation. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2009;8:959–968.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oldham, M. C., Horvath, S. and Geschwind, D. H. Conservation and evolution of gene coexpression networks in human and chimpanzee brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 2006;103:17973–17978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oldham, M., Konopka, G., Iwamota, K., et al. Functional organization of the transcriptome in human brain. Nature Neuroscience. 2008;11:1271–1282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Overington, J. P., Al-Lazikani, B. and Hopkins, A. L.How many drug targets are there?Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2006;5:993–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozolinš, T. R. S. De-risking developmental toxicity-mediated drug attrition in the pharmaceutical industry. In Predictive Toxicology in Drug Safety, ed. Xu, J. J. and Urban, L. (pp. 153–182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. M. and Stephenson, F. A. CNS drug discovery: Challenges and solutions. Drug News Perspectives. 2005;18:51–57.Google ScholarPubMed
Pearl, J. Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perou, C. M., Sorlie, T., Eisen, M. B., et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406:747–752.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
PhRMA. Profile of the Biopharmaceutical Research Industry (2014). www.phrma.org/sites/default/files/pdf/2014_PhRMA_Profiles.pdf.
Preskorn, S. H. CNS drug development: Part 1: The early period of CNS drugs. Journal of Psychiatric Practice. 2010a;16:334–339.Google ScholarPubMed
Preskorn, S. H. CNS drug development: Part 2: Advances from the 1960s to the 1990s. Journal of Psychiatric Practice. 2010b;16:413–415.Google ScholarPubMed
Ravasz, E., Somera, A. L., Mongru, D. A., Oltvai, Z. N. and Barabasi, A.-L.Hierarchical organization of modularity in metabolic networks. Science. 2002;297:1551–1555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saboo, A. Biopharma posts a chart-topping 41 new drug approvals in 2014. FierceBiotech (www.fiercebiotech.com). 2015, Jan 2.
Sacca, R., Engle, S. J., Qin, W., et al. Genetically engineered mouse models in drug discovery research. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2010;602:37–54.Google ScholarPubMed
Schadt, E. E., Friend, S. H. and Shaywitz, D. A. A network view of disease and compound screening. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2009;8:286–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sirota, M., Dudley, J. T., Kim, J., et al. Discovery and preclinical validation of drug indications using compendia of public gene expression data. Science Translational Medicine. 2011;3:1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swinney, D. C. and Anthony, J.How were new medicines discovered?Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2011;10:507–519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tall, A. R. CETP inhibitors to increase HDL cholesterol levels. New England Journal of Medicine. 2007;356:1364–1366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tian, J. and Patel, J. M. TALE: A tool for approximate large graph matching. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Data Engineering, Cancun, Mexico (pp. 963–972). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society, 2008.Google Scholar
Wang, S., Yehya, N., Schadt, E. E., et al. Genetic and genomic analysis of a fat mass trait with complex inheritance reveals marked sex specificity. PLoS Genetics. 2006;2: e15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wishart, D. S. Drugbank: A comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration. Nucleic Acids Research. 2006;34: D668–D672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xiong, H. Y., Alipanahi, B., Lee, L. J., et al. The human splicing code reveals new insights into the genetic determinants of disease. Science. 2015;347:1254806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yildirim, M. A., Goh, K.-I., Cusick, M. E., Barabasi, A.-L. and Vidal, M.Drug–target network. Nature Biotechnology. 2007;25:1119–1126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zambrowski, B. P. and Sands, A. T.Knockouts model the 100 best-selling drugs – Will they model the next 100?Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2003;2:38–51.Google Scholar
Zhang, B. and Horvath, S.A general framework for weighted gene co-expression network analysis. Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology. 2005;4: Article 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×