The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Properties of Known Drugs. 1. Molecular Frameworks
Abstract
In order to better understand the common features present in drug molecules, we use shape description methods to analyze a database of commercially available drugs and prepare a list of common drug shapes. A useful way of organizing this structural data is to group the atoms of each drug molecule into ring, linker, framework, and side chain atoms. On the basis of the two-dimensional molecular structures (without regard to atom type, hybridization, and bond order), there are 1179 different frameworks among the 5120 compounds analyzed. However, the shapes of half of the drugs in the database are described by the 32 most frequently occurring frameworks. This suggests that the diversity of shapes in the set of known drugs is extremely low. In our second method of analysis, in which atom type, hybridization, and bond order are considered, more diversity is seen; there are 2506 different frameworks among the 5120 compounds in the database, and the most frequently occurring 42 frameworks account for only one-fourth of the drugs. We discuss the possible interpretations of these findings and the way they may be used to guide future drug discovery research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
MoleculeNet: a benchmark for molecular machine learning
Wu, Z., Ramsundar, B., Feinberg, E. N., Gomes, J., Geniesse, C., Pappu, A. S., Leswing, K., & Pande, V. (2018) · Chemical Science · doi:10.1039/c7sc02664a · Cited by 3,107
Directory of useful decoys, enhanced (DUD-E): better ligands and decoys for better benchmarking.
Mysinger, M. M., Carchia, M., Irwin, J. J., & Shoichet, B. K. (2012) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm300687e · Cited by 2,412
Generating Focused Molecule Libraries for Drug Discovery with Recurrent Neural Networks
Segler, M. H. S., Kogej, T., Tyrchan, C., & Waller, M. P. (2018) · ACS Central Science · doi:10.1021/acscentsci.7b00512 · Cited by 1,537
Enumeration of 166 Billion Organic Small Molecules in the Chemical Universe Database GDB-17
Ruddigkeit, L., van Deursen, R., Blum, L. C., & Reymond, J.-L. (2012) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci300415d · Cited by 1,505
Ultra-large library docking for discovering new chemotypes
Lyu, J., Wang, S., Balius, T. E., Singh, I., Levit, A., Moroz, Y. S., O’Meara, M. J., Che, T., Algaa, E., Tolmachova, K., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-0917-9 · Cited by 998
Molecular Sets (MOSES): A Benchmarking Platform for Molecular Generation Models
Polykovskiy, D., Zhebrak, A., Sanchez-Lengeling, B., Golovanov, S., Tatanov, O., Belyaev, S., Kurbanov, R., Artamonov, A., Aladinskiy, V., Veselov, M., et al. (2020) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2020.565644 · Cited by 849
Automated design of ligands to polypharmacological profiles
Besnard, J., Ruda, G. F., Setola, V., Abecassis, K., Rodriguiz, R. M., Huang, X.-P., Norval, S., Sassano, M. F., Shin, A. I., Webster, L. A., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11691 · Cited by 832
Reymond, J.-L. (2015) · Accounts of Chemical Research · doi:10.1021/ar500432k · Cited by 720
A practical guide to large-scale docking
Bender, B. J., Gahbauer, S., Luttens, A., Lyu, J., Webb, C. M., Stein, R. M., Fink, E. A., Balius, T. E., Carlsson, J., Irwin, J. J., et al. (2021) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/s41596-021-00597-z · Cited by 546
“Model biases are evaluated using an Extrema control set (Steps 78 – 88) to examine for charge preferences in the scoring grids and with a small-scale in-stock screen (Steps 89 – 97) to ensure a computationally expensive large-scale prospective screen (Steps 98 – 103) is likely to yield interesting…”
BackgroundMethodREINVENT 2.0: An AI Tool for De Novo Drug Design
Blaschke, T., Arús-Pous, J., Chen, H., Margreitter, C., Tyrchan, C., Engkvist, O., Papadopoulos, K., & Patronov, A. (2020) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00915 · Cited by 496
Can We Learn To Distinguish between “Drug-like” and “Nondrug-like” Molecules?
Ajay, Walters, W. P., & Murcko, M. A. (1998) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm970666c · Cited by 484
Self-citationChemical substructures that enrich for biological activity
Klekota, J., & Roth, F. P. (2008) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btn479 · Cited by 392
Exposing the Limitations of Molecular Machine Learning with Activity Cliffs
van Tilborg, D., Alenicheva, A., & Grisoni, F. (2022) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01073 · Cited by 337
Lenselink, E. B., ten Dijke, N., Bongers, B., Papadatos, G., van Vlijmen, H. W. T., Kowalczyk, W., IJzerman, A. P., & van Westen, G. J. P. (2017) · Journal of Cheminformatics · doi:10.1186/s13321-017-0232-0 · Cited by 334
Virshup, A. M., Contreras-García, J., Wipf, P., Yang, W., & Beratan, D. N. (2013) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja401184g · Cited by 294
Matched Molecular Pairs as a Medicinal Chemistry Tool: Miniperspective
Griffen, E., Leach, A. G., Robb, G. R., & Warner, D. J. (2011) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm200452d · Cited by 282
Is Multitask Deep Learning Practical for Pharma?
Ramsundar, B., Liu, B., Wu, Z., Verras, A., Tudor, M., Sheridan, R. P., & Pande, V. (2017) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00146 · Cited by 263
Shape-Based Generative Modeling for de Novo Drug Design
Skalic, M., Jiménez, J., Sabbadin, D., & De Fabritiis, G. (2019) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00706 · Cited by 229
Generative molecular design in low data regimes
Moret, M., Friedrich, L., Grisoni, F., Merk, D., & Schneider, G. (2020) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-020-0160-y · Cited by 219
Modeling the expansion of virtual screening libraries
Lyu, J., Irwin, J. J., & Shoichet, B. K. (2023) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/s41589-022-01234-w · Cited by 193
Combining generative artificial intelligence and on-chip synthesis for de novo drug design
Grisoni, F., Huisman, B. J. H., Button, A. L., Moret, M., Atz, K., Merk, D., & Schneider, G. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abg3338 · Cited by 190
Rodríguez-Rodríguez, C., Telpoukhovskaia, M., & Orvig, C. (2012) · Coordination Chemistry Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2012.03.008 · Cited by 151
Atomic convolutional networks for predicting protein-ligand binding affinity
Gomes, J., Ramsundar, B., Feinberg, E. N., & Pande, V. S. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1703.10603 · Cited by 150
Fragment-Based Lead Discovery and Design
Joseph-McCarthy, D., Campbell, A. J., Kern, G., & Moustakas, D. (2014) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci400731w · Cited by 129
Extending the small-molecule similarity principle to all levels of biology with the Chemical Checker
Duran-Frigola, M., Pauls, E., Guitart-Pla, O., Bertoni, M., Alcalde, V., Amat, D., Juan-Blanco, T., & Aloy, P. (2020) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-020-0502-7 · Cited by 126
Bender, A., Jenkins, J. L., Glick, M., Deng, Z., Nettles, J. H., & Davies, J. W. (2006) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci600197y · Cited by 110
Badapple: promiscuity patterns from noisy evidence
Yang, J. J., Ursu, O., Lipinski, C. A., Sklar, L. A., Oprea, T. I., & Bologa, C. G. (2016) · Journal of Cheminformatics · doi:10.1186/s13321-016-0137-3 · Cited by 103
Link-INVENT: Generative Linker Design with Reinforcement Learning
Guo, J., Knuth, F., Margreitter, C., Janet, J. P., Papadopoulos, K., Engkvist, O., & Patronov, A. (2022) · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2022-qkx9f · Cited by 101
RELATION: A Deep Generative Model for Structure-Based De Novo Drug Design
Wang, M., Hsieh, C.-Y., Wang, J., Wang, D., Weng, G., Shen, C., Yao, X., Bing, Z., Li, H., Cao, D., et al. (2022) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.jmedchem.2c00732 · Cited by 99
Effectiveness of molecular fingerprints for exploring the chemical space of natural products
Boldini, D., Ballabio, D., Consonni, V., Todeschini, R., Grisoni, F., & Sieber, S. A. (2024) · Journal of Cheminformatics · doi:10.1186/s13321-024-00830-3 · Cited by 97
Bioactivity descriptors for uncharacterized chemical compounds
Bertoni, M., Duran-Frigola, M., Badia-i-Mompel, P., Pauls, E., Orozco-Ruiz, M., Guitart-Pla, O., Alcalde, V., Diaz, V. M., Berenguer-Llergo, A., Brun-Heath, I., et al. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-24150-4 · Cited by 92
Fragment Informatics and Computational Fragment‐Based Drug Design: An Overview and Update
Sheng, C., & Zhang, W. (2013) · Medicinal Research Reviews · doi:10.1002/med.21255 · Cited by 80
Thomas, M., Smith, R. T., O’Boyle, N. M., de Graaf, C., & Bender, A. (2021) · Journal of Cheminformatics · doi:10.1186/s13321-021-00516-0 · Cited by 78
Deep contrastive learning enables genome-wide virtual screening
Jia, Y., Gao, B., Tan, J., Zheng, J., Hong, X., Zhu, W., Tan, H., Xiao, Y., Tan, L., Cai, H., et al. (2026) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.ads9530 · Cited by 66
Mishra, N., Tiwari, V. K., & Schmidt, R. R. (2020) · Carbohydrates in Drug Discovery and Development · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-816675-8.00001-4 · Cited by 17
Park, M., Yi, J.-M., Kim, N. S., Lee, S.-Y., & Lee, H. (2024) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms25094636 · Cited by 11
Enforcing Predictive Invariance across Structured Biomedical Domains
Jin, W., Barzilay, R., & Jaakkola, T. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.03908 · Cited by 8
PCF-VAE: posterior collapse free variational autoencoder for de novo drug design
Bhadwal, A. S., Kumari, M., & Kumar, A. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-14285-5 · Cited by 7
“The metric is defined as : • Scaffold Sililarity (Scaf) : This metric exhibits resemblances to fragment similarity—as described by Bemis and Murcko 38 , the comparison is performed utilizing Bemis-Murcko scaffolds.”
Quantifying the Hardness of Bioactivity Prediction Tasks for Transfer Learning
Fooladi, H., Hirte, S., & Kirchmair, J. (2024) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.4c00160 · Cited by 6
Zhang, S., Xie, L., Tiourine, D., & Xie, L. (2026) · Journal of Cheminformatics · doi:10.1186/s13321-026-01227-0 · Cited by 2
Wallach, I., Dzamba, M., & Heifets, A. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1510.02855
Metadata
- Authors
- Bemis, G. W., & Murcko, M. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 1996-01-01
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 2887-2893
- ISSN
- 0022-2623 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-4804
- OpenAlex
- W2060531713
- Cited by
- 2,482
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
