Cited by 2,427Computational Drug Discovery MethodsBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies

A comprehensive map of molecular drug targets

Open access
Santos, Rita, Ursu, Oleg, Gaulton, Anna, Bento, A. Patrícia, Donadi, Ramesh S., Bologa, Cristian G., Karlsson, Anneli, Al-Lazikani, Bissan +3 more·2017·Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

Abstract

The success of mechanism-based drug discovery depends on the definition of the drug target. This definition becomes even more important as we try to link drug response to genetic variation, understand stratified clinical efficacy and safety, rationalize the differences between drugs in the same therapeutic class and predict drug utility in patient subgroups. However, drug targets are often poorly defined in the literature, both for launched drugs and for potential therapeutic agents in discovery and development. Here, we present an updated comprehensive map of molecular targets of approved drugs. We curate a total of 893 human and pathogen-derived biomolecules through which 1,578 US FDA-approved drugs act. These biomolecules include 667 human-genome-derived proteins targeted by drugs for human disease. Analysis of these drug targets indicates the continued dominance of privileged target families across disease areas, but also the growth of novel first-in-class mechanisms, particularly in oncology. We explore the relationships between bioactivity class and clinical success, as well as the presence of orthologues between human and animal models and between pathogen and human genomes. Through the collaboration of three independent teams, we highlight some of the ongoing challenges in accurately defining the targets of molecular therapeutics and present conventions for deconvoluting the complexities of molecular pharmacology and drug efficacy.

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.2016.230

Cites

61 of 61 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?

  • Tclin currently consists of about 600 protein targets.

    “Tclin currently consists of ~600 protein targets9”

    From Unexplored therapeutic opportunities in the human genome (2018) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Concluding thoughts and future work section identifies Tclin as a subset of the merged drug-efficacy-target data, and Drugs, targets and therapeutic areas reports 667 unique human protein efficacy targets in the merged data. Our copy does not give a count for the Tclin subset, so it does not establish that Tclin itself contains about 600 protein targets; no page numbers are available in the supplied passages. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • GPCRs are the largest family of druggable targets in the human genome, with 20-30% of approved drugs acting on them.

    “GPCRs represent the largest family of druggable targets in the human genome9, with between 20% and 30% of approved drugs acting on them53,54.”

    From Unexplored therapeutic opportunities in the human genome (2018) · cites this paper as [9]

    In the citing sentence, this source is cited for the drug-percentage claim, not the preceding ‘largest family’ claim. The Drugs, targets and therapeutic areas section reports that rhodopsin-like GPCRs account for the therapeutic effect of 33% of approved small-molecule drugs, rather than 20–30% of approved drugs generally. Our copy provides no page number for the passage. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • 217 drugs in DrugCentral act through 125 Tclin ion channels for MoA.

    “There are 217 drugs annotated in DrugCentral10 as acting through 125 (T) ion channels for the MoA9.”

    From Unexplored therapeutic opportunities in the human genome (2018) · cites this paper as [9]

    In “Drugs, targets and therapeutic areas” (page unavailable), the paper says it combined DrugCentral with other databases and identifies ion channels as efficacy targets for approved drugs. It reports percentages for ion-channel targets and drugs, but does not give the claimed 217 drugs, 125 Tclin ion channels, or a DrugCentral-only count. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Proteins that directly regulate transcription had one of the highest success rates for drug approval among different classes of drug target proteins.

    “Interestingly, among different classes of drug target proteins, proteins that directly regulate transcription had one of the highest success rates for drug approval, according to a critical evaluation of all bioactive molecules with drug-like properties in ChEMBL data43.”

    From Effects of SPI1-mediated transcriptome remodeling on Alzheimer's disease-related phenotypes in mouse models of Aβ amyloidosis (2024) · cites this paper as [43]

    The ‘Drugs, targets and therapeutic areas’ section reports relative enrichment of approved drugs for nuclear receptors when compared with compounds targeting them in ChEMBL. Nuclear receptors are a transcription-regulating target family, but the paper does not establish that proteins directly regulating transcription as a broader class had one of the highest drug-approval success rates. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Tclin assignment relied on exhaustive manual searches of primary literature and drug labels to identify mechanism-of-action links.

    “Classification into this TDL category was achieved through exhaustive manual querying of primary literature and drug labels for MoA assignments with respect to molecular (protein) targets9”

    From Unexplored therapeutic opportunities in the human genome (2018) · cites this paper as [9]

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: 1

  1. [55]Huttunen KM Raunio H Rautio J Prodrugs — from serendipity to rational design Pharmacol Rev 2011 63 750 771 21737530

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Santos, R., Ursu, O., Gaulton, A., Bento, A. P., Donadi, R. S., Bologa, C. G., Karlsson, A., Al-Lazikani, B., Hersey, A., Oprea, T. I., & Overington, J. P.
Affiliations
  • European Bioinformatics Institute (GB)
  • University of New Mexico (US)
Corresponding author
  • Hersey, Anne
  • Oprea, Tudor I.
  • Overington, John P.
Venue
Nature Reviews Drug Discovery
Published
2016-12-02
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
19-34
ISSN
  • 1474-1776 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-1784
OpenAlex
W2558217333
Cited by
2,427
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 236 · 2025: 302 · 2024: 307 · 2023: 247 · 2022: 275 · 2021: 284 · 2020: 251 · 2019: 209 · 2018: 200 · 2017: 107 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
13.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Drug Discovery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (104104/A/14/Z, WT104104/Z/14/Z, WT086151/Z/08/Z)
  • European Bioinformatics Institute
  • Cancer Research UK (11566, 22897)
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001449)
  • National Cancer Institute (U54CA189205, P30CA118100)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Keywords
therapeutic target, molecular therapeutic targets, approved drugs, model organisms, oncology drugs, drug efficacy, molecular pharmacology
MeSH terms
Humans, Pharmacogenetics, Drug Prescriptions, United States, United States Food and Drug Administration, Genetic Variation, Genome, Human, Drug Delivery Systems, Drug Approval, Drug Discovery, Databases, Pharmaceutical

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