Cited by 1,486Protein Degradation and InhibitorsUbiquitin and proteasome pathwaysChemical Synthesis and Analysis

Induced protein degradation: an emerging drug discovery paradigm

Open access
Lai, Ashton C., Crews, Craig M.·2017·Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

Abstract

Small-molecule drug discovery has traditionally focused on occupancy of a binding site that directly affects protein function, and this approach typically precludes targeting proteins that lack such amenable sites. Furthermore, high systemic drug exposures may be needed to maintain sufficient target inhibition in vivo, increasing the risk of undesirable off-target effects. Induced protein degradation is an alternative approach that is event-driven: upon drug binding, the target protein is tagged for elimination. Emerging technologies based on proteolysis-targeting chimaeras (PROTACs) that exploit cellular quality control machinery to selectively degrade target proteins are attracting considerable attention in the pharmaceutical industry owing to the advantages they could offer over traditional small-molecule strategies. These advantages include the potential to reduce systemic drug exposure, the ability to counteract increased target protein expression that often accompanies inhibition of protein function and the potential ability to target proteins that are not currently therapeutically tractable, such as transcription factors, scaffolding and regulatory proteins.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrd.2016.211

Cites

219 of 219 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The PROTAC technique can aid small molecule inhibitors or peptides to exert better biological activities in vivo by linking the ubiquitin-proteasome system to induce degradation of targeted proteins.

    “The PROTAC technique could aid small molecule inhibitors or peptides to exert better biological activities in vivo as PROTAC can link the ubiquitin-proteasome system to induce effective degradation of targeted proteins16.”

    From A PROTAC peptide induces durable β-catenin degradation and suppresses Wnt-dependent intestinal cancer (2020) · cites this paper as [16]

    The Small-molecule PROTACs section (§4; page not provided) explains that PROTACs recruit an E3 ligase to degrade a target and reports mouse-xenograft evidence of better in vivo efficacy than parent inhibitors. The Peptide-based PROTACs section (§4; page not provided) describes peptide-based degradation mainly in cells and notes poor cell penetration; it does not establish better in vivo activity for peptide-based PROTACs. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • PROTAC molecules exhibit improved therapeutic efficacy and minimized drug resistance because of the potential for unique catalytic recycling.

    “Third, PROTAC molecules exhibit improved therapeutic efficacy and minimized drug resistance because of the potential for unique catalytic recycling (23, 24).”

    From Small-molecule PROTAC mediates targeted protein degradation to treat STAT3-dependent epithelial cancer (2022) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Small-molecule PROTACs section reports that non-covalent PROTACs act catalytically, may require less drug exposure, and showed superior efficacy to parent inhibitors in mouse tumor xenografts. It also says protein removal can counteract compensatory accumulation associated with inhibitors, but does not establish that catalytic recycling minimizes drug resistance or that improved therapeutic efficacy has been demonstrated clinically. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A targeted protein degrader is a chimeric small molecule that recruits a target protein into proximity of an E3 ubiquitin ligase, promoting polyubiquitylation and degradation of the target via the ubiquitin proteasome system.

    “A targeted protein degrader is a chimeric small molecule that recruits target protein into the proximity of an E3 ubiquitin ligase, which then promotes polyubiquitylation of the target, triggering its degradation via the ubiquitin proteasome system (88, 89).”
  • PROTAC adopts event-driven pharmacology binding at any point within the structure of potential targets, unlike occupancy-mode small molecule inhibitors.

    “Unlike the occupancy mode of small molecule inhibitors, which increase the risk of off-target effects, PROTAC adopts the pattern of “event-driven” pharmacology binding at any point within the structure of potential targets (23, 24).”
  • PROTACs are bivalent small molecules containing a ligand that recognizes a target protein linked to another ligand that recruits a specific E3 ubiquitin ligase.

    “PROTACs are bivalent small molecules containing a ligand that recognizes a target protein linked to another ligand that recruits a specific E3 ubiquitin ligase29,30.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [58]Katerina S Evangelia P HSP90 Inhibitors: Current Development and Potential in Cancer Therapy Recent Patents on Anti-Cancer Drug Discovery 9 1 20 2014 23312026
  2. [189]Demetri GD A. L. C. Von Mehren M Chmielowski B Bauer S Chow WA Rodenas E McKee K Grayzel DS Kang Y 2010 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium 2010

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lai, A. C., & Crews, C. M.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Crews, Craig M.
Venue
Nature Reviews Drug Discovery
Published
2016-11-25
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
101-114
ISSN
  • 1474-1776 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-1784
OpenAlex
W2553908226
Cited by
1,486
References
219
Citations by year
2026: 162 · 2025: 188 · 2024: 199 · 2023: 162 · 2022: 171 · 2021: 168 · 2020: 177 · 2019: 133 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 48
FWCI
7.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Drug Discovery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R35CA197589)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007205)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Degradation and Inhibitors
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Ubiquitin and proteasome pathways
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Chemical Synthesis and Analysis
Keywords
PROTACs, small molecule drug discovery, cell quality control, selective protein degradation, off-target effects, drug exposure, transcription factors, scaffold proteins, regulatory proteins
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Protein Binding, Proteins, Proteomics, Mutant Chimeric Proteins, Small Molecule Libraries, Drug Discovery, High-Throughput Screening Assays

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