The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Expanding the Number of ‘Druggable’ Targets: Non‐Enzymes and Protein–Protein Interactions
Open accessAbstract
Following sequencing and assembly of the human genome, the preferred methods for identification of new drug targets have changed dramatically. Modern tactics such as genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) and deep sequencing are fundamentally different from the pharmacology‐guided approaches used previously, in which knowledge of small molecule ligands acting at their cellular targets was the primary discovery engine. A consequence of the ‘target‐first, pharmacology‐second’ strategy is that many predicted drug targets are non‐enzymes, such as scaffolding, regulatory or structural proteins, and their activities are often dependent on protein–protein interactions (PPIs). These types of targets create unique challenges to drug discovery efforts because enzymatic turnover cannot be used as a convenient surrogate for compound potency. Moreover, it is often challenging to predict how ligand binding to non‐enzymes might affect changes in protein function and/or pathobiology. Thus, in the postgenomic era, targets might be strongly implicated by molecular biology‐based methods, yet they often later earn the designation of ‘undruggable’. Can the scope of available targets be widened to include these promising, but challenging, non‐enzymes? In this review, we discuss advances in high‐throughput screening (HTS) technology and chemical library design that are emerging to deal with these challenges.
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
Cites
In Vivo Activation of the p53 Pathway by Small-Molecule Antagonists of MDM2
Vassilev, L. T., Vu, B. T., Graves, B., Carvajal, D., Podlaski, F., Filipovic, Z., Kong, N., Kammlott, U., Lukacs, C., Klein, C., et al. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1092472 · Cited by 4,661
How many drug targets are there?
Overington, J. P., Al-Lazikani, B., & Hopkins, A. L. (2006) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd2199 · Cited by 3,505
Hopkins, A. L., & Groom, C. R. (2002) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd892 · Cited by 3,305
Small-molecule inhibitors of protein–protein interactions: progressing towards the dream
Arkin, M. R., & Wells, J. A. (2004) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd1343 · Cited by 1,705
Direct inhibition of the NOTCH transcription factor complex
Moellering, R. E., Cornejo, M., Davis, T. N., Bianco, C. D., Aster, J. C., Blacklow, S. C., Kung, A. L., Gilliland, D. G., Verdine, G. L., & Bradner, J. E. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08543 · Cited by 752
Fragment-Based Approaches in Drug Discovery and Chemical Biology
Scott, D. E., Coyne, A. G., Hudson, S. A., & Abell, C. (2012) · Biochemistry · doi:10.1021/bi3005126 · Cited by 460
Lester, H. A., Xiao, C., Srinivasan, R., Son, C. D., Miwa, J., Pantoja, R., Banghart, M. R., Dougherty, D. A., Goate, A. M., & Wang, J. C. (2009) · The AAPS Journal · doi:10.1208/s12248-009-9090-7 · Cited by 163
Cited by
Drugging the ‘undruggable’ cancer targets
Dang, C. V., Reddy, E. P., Shokat, K. M., & Soucek, L. (2017) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc.2017.36 · Cited by 927
“To name a few: some researchers are revisiting older techniques but with more effective delivery systems (that is, siRNA 43 or antisense oligonucleotides in nanoparticles 44 ), others are tweaking the ubiquitin system to hijack the degradation machinery and target specific cancer drivers 45 , and some are developing s…”
InfluentialGlobal profiling of lysine reactivity and ligandability in the human proteome
Hacker, S. M., Backus, K. M., Lazear, M. R., Forli, S., Correia, B. E., & Cravatt, B. F. (2017) · Nature Chemistry · doi:10.1038/nchem.2826 · Cited by 485
Oncogenic protein interfaces: small molecules, big challenges
Nero, T. L., Morton, C. J., Holien, J. K., Wielens, J., & Parker, M. W. (2014) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc3690 · Cited by 312
RNA Display Methods for the Discovery of Bioactive Macrocycles
Huang, Y., Wiedmann, M. M., & Suga, H. (2019) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00430 · Cited by 298
Pharos: collating protein information to shed light on the druggable genome
Nguyen, D.-T., Mathias, S., Bologa, C., Brunak, S., Fernandez, N., Gaulton, A., Hersey, A., Holmes, J., Jensen, L. J., Karlsson, A., et al. (2017) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkw1072 · Cited by 279
Metadata
- Authors
- Makley, L. N., & Gestwicki, J. E.
- Venue
- Chemical Biology & Drug Design
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-12-17
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 22-32
- ISSN
- 1747-0277 (ISSN-L)
- 1747-0285
- OpenAlex
- W2099388354
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 16.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Expanding the Number of ‘Druggable’ Targets: Non‐Enzymes and Protein–Protein Interactions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/cbdd.12066
- The paper
- Makley, L. N., & Gestwicki, J. E. (2013). Expanding the Number of ‘Druggable’ Targets: Non‐Enzymes and Protein–Protein Interactions. Chemical Biology & Drug Design. https://doi.org/10.1111/cbdd.12066
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.
