Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Chemogenomics: an emerging strategy for rapid target and drug discovery

Nature Reviews Genetics volume 5, pages 262–275 (2004)Cite this article

Key Points

  • Chemogenomics is the study of the genomic and/or proteomic response of an intact biological system to chemical compounds, or the ability of isolated molecular targets to interact with such compounds.

  • In chemogenomics, large collections of chemical compounds are screened for the parallel identification of biological targets and biologically active compounds.

  • In reverse chemogenomics, gene sequences of interest are expressed as target proteins and screened in a high-throughput, 'target-based' manner by compound libraries. On the basis of the structure–activity relationship homology concept, particular emphasis is placed on the parallel exploration of gene and protein families.

  • In forward chemogenomics, active compounds are identified on the basis of their conditional phenotypic effect on a whole biological system rather than on their inhibition of a specific protein target, followed by the subsequent study of the mechanistic basis of the phenotype.

  • Predictive chemogenomics strategies primarily attempt to holistically characterize gene–compound response associations by concurrently considering the response profiles of thousands of drug responses, coupled with the secondary aim of identifying novel therapeutic molecules.

  • Computational or in silico methods complement experimental chemogenomics strategies in the search for targets and drugs.

  • Chemogenomics has garnered support from virtually all areas of medical research.

  • Cancer research was particularly poised to take advantage of the high-throughput nature of chemogenomics, as the approach can help to identify treatment strategies that selectively target the multiple and complex molecular alterations that are observed in human tumours.

  • Chemogenomics faces unique and mainly technical challenges, including the need for a more refined integration of bioinformatics and chemoinformatics data, a more rational approach to selecting designed compounds from an almost infinite number of synthetic possibilities and the ability to build more focused libraries for screening.

  • A recent trend in chemogenomics focuses on data quality rather than on the number of data points that can be generated.

Abstract

Chemogenomics is an emerging discipline that combines the latest tools of genomics and chemistry and applies them to target and drug discovery. Its strength lies in eliminating the bottleneck that currently occurs in target identification by measuring the broad, conditional effects of chemical libraries on whole biological systems or by screening large chemical libraries quickly and efficiently against selected targets. The hope is that chemogenomics will concurrently identify and validate therapeutic targets and detect drug candidates to rapidly and effectively generate new treatments for many human diseases.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Forward- and reverse-experimental chemogenomic approaches.
Figure 2: Predictive chemogenomics model.
Figure 3: Relevance network between genome and drug effect.

References

  1. Hopkins, A. L. & Groom, C. R. The druggable genome. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 727–730 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Drews, J. Genomic sciences and the medicine of tomorrow. Nature Biotechnol. 14, 1516–1518 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Venter, J. C. et al. The sequence of the human genome. Science 291, 1304–1351 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Human Gonome Sequencing Consortium. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 409, 860–921 (2001).

  5. Kim, J. A. Targeted therapies for the treatment of cancer. Am. J. Surg. 186, 264–268 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wolcke, J. & Ullmann, D. Miniaturized HTS technologies — uHTS. Drug Discov. Today 6, 637–646 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stockwell, B. R., Haggarty, S. J. & Schreiber, S. L. High-throughput screening of small molecules in miniaturized mammalian cell-based assays involving post-translational modifications. Chem. Biol. 6, 71–83 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stockwell, B. R. Chemical genetics: ligand-based discovery of gene function. Nature Rev. Genet. 1, 116–125 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Stockwell, B. R. Frontiers in chemical genetics. Trends Biotechnol. 18, 449–455 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Walters, W. P. & Namchuk, M. Designing screens: how to make your hits a hit. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 259–266 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Entzeroth, M. Emerging trends in high-throughput screening. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 3, 522–529 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Muller, O. et al. Identification of potent Ras signaling inhibitors by pathway-selective phenotype-based screening. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 43, 450–454 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Shoemaker, R. H. et al. Application of high-throughput, molecular-targeted screening to anticancer drug discovery. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2, 229–246 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pantoliano, M. W. et al. High-density miniaturized thermal shift assays as a general strategy for drug discovery. J. Biomol. Screen. 6, 429–440 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shin, Y. G. & van Breemen, R. B. Analysis and screening of combinatorial libraries using mass spectrometry. Biopharm. Drug Dispos. 22, 353–372 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Muckenschnabel, I., Falchetto, R., Mayr, L. M. & Filipuzzi, I. SpeedScreen: label-free liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-based high-throughput screening for the discovery of orphan protein ligands. Anal. Biochem. 324, 241–249 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chan, T. F., Carvalho, J., Riles, L. & Zheng, X. F. A chemical genomics approach toward understanding the global functions of the target of rapamycin protein (TOR). Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 13227–13232 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Griffith, E. C. et al. Methionine aminopeptidase (type 2) is the common target for angiogenesis inhibitors AGM-1470 and ovalicin. Chem. Biol. 4, 461–471 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sin, N. et al. The anti-angiogenic agent fumagillin covalently binds and inhibits the methionine aminopeptidase, MetAP-2. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 6099–6103 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Zewail, A. et al. Novel functions of the phosphatidylinositol metabolic pathway discovered by a chemical genomics screen with wortmannin. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 3345–3350 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Marton, M. J. et al. Drug target validation and identification of secondary drug target effects using DNA microarrays. Nature Med. 4, 1293–1301 (1998). Describes an approach based on genome-wide gene-expression patterns to identify the immediate pathways that are altered by a drug and to detect drug effects that are mediated by unintended targets.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dolma, S., Lessnick, S. L., Hahn, W. C. & Stockwell, B. R. Identification of genotype-selective antitumor agents using synthetic lethal chemical screening in engineered human tumor cells. Cancer Cell 3, 285–296 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kwon, H. J. Chemical genomics-based target identification and validation of anti-angiogenic agents. Curr. Med. Chem. 10, 717–736 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Carr, R. & Jhoti, H. Structure-based screening of low-affinity compounds. Drug Discov. Today 7, 522–527 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bleicher, K. H. Chemogenomics: bridging a drug discovery gap. Curr. Med. Chem. 9, 2077–2084 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Jung, M., Kim, H. & Kim, M. Chemical genomics strategy for the discovery of new anticancer agents. Curr. Med. Chem. 10, 757–762 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Goodnow, R. A. Jr, Guba, W. & Haap, W. Library design practices for success in lead generation with small molecule libraries. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 6, 649–660 (2003). Summary of current practices in the design of compound libraries for use in drug discovery, focusing on the generation of novel structures that are amenable to rapid and efficient lead optimization.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Root, D. E., Flaherty, S. P., Kelley, B. P. & Stockwell, B. R. Biological mechanism profiling using an annotated compound library. Chem. Biol. 10, 881–892 (2003). Annotated compound libraries with known biological activity are introduced to guide experiments for pathway elucidation. Algorithms for the build-up of annotations from Medline reports and for scoring statistically enriched mechanisms are also described.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Eguchi, M. et al. Chemogenomics with peptide secondary structure mimetics. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 6, 611–621 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Abel, U., Koch, C., Speitling, M. & Hansske, F. G. Modern methods to produce natural-product libraries. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 6, 453–458 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Burke, M. D. & Schreiber, S. L. A planning strategy for diversity-oriented synthesis. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 43, 46–58 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Ki, S. W. et al. Radicicol binds and inhibits mammalian ATP citrate lyase. J. Biol. Chem. 275, 39231–39236 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sharma, S. V., Agatsuma, T. & Nakano, H. Targeting of the protein chaperone, HSP90, by the transformation suppressing agent, radicicol. Oncogene 16, 2639–2645 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Soga, S. et al. KF25706, a novel oxime derivative of radicicol, exhibits in vivo antitumor activity via selective depletion of Hsp90 binding signaling molecules. Cancer Res. 59, 2931–2938 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Giaever, G. et al. Chemogenomic profiling: identifying the functional interactions of small molecules in yeast. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 793–798 (2004). Demonstrates the efficacy of a genome-wide protocol in yeast that allows the identification of gene products that functionally interact as on- or off-targets with small molecules, thereby allowing an understanding of the in vivo response to small-molecule perturbants.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Han, C. K. et al. Design and synthesis of highly potent fumagillin analogues from homology modeling for a human MetAP-2. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 10, 39–43 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ueda, H., Nakajima, H., Hori, Y., Goto, T. & Okuhara, M. Action of FR901228, a novel antitumor bicyclic depsipeptide produced by Chromobacterium violaceum no. 968, on Ha-ras transformed NIH3T3 cells. Biosci. Biotechnol Biochem. 58, 1579–1583 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Yoshida, M., Kijima, M., Akita, M. & Beppu, T. Potent and specific inhibition of mammalian histone deacetylase both in vivo and in vitro by trichostatin A. J. Biol. Chem. 265, 17174–17179 (1990).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kwon, H. J., Owa, T., Hassig, C. A., Shimada, J. & Schreiber, S. L. Depudecin induces morphological reversion of transformed fibroblasts via the inhibition of histone deacetylase. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, 3356–3361 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Sandor, V. et al. Phase I trial of the histone deacetylase inhibitor, depsipeptide (FR901228, NSC 630176), in patients with refractory neoplasms. Clin. Cancer Res. 8, 718–728 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Piekarz, R. L. et al. Inhibitor of histone deacetylation, depsipeptide (FR901228), in the treatment of peripheral and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma: a case report. Blood 98, 2865–2868 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Marshall, J. L. et al. A phase I trial of depsipeptide (FR901228) in patients with advanced cancer. J. Exp. Ther. Oncol. 2, 325–332 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Carducci, M. A. et al. A Phase I clinical and pharmacological evaluation of sodium phenylbutyrate on an 120-h infusion schedule. Clin. Cancer Res. 7, 3047–3055 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Gore, S. D. et al. Impact of prolonged infusions of the putative differentiating agent sodium phenylbutyrate on myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukemia. Clin. Cancer Res. 8, 963–970 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Nemunaitis, J. J. et al. Phase I study of oral CI-994 in combination with gemcitabine in treatment of patients with advanced cancer. Cancer J. 9, 58–66 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Kelly, W. K. et al. Phase I clinical trial of histone deacetylase inhibitor: suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid administered intravenously. Clin. Cancer Res. 9, 3578–3588 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Nguyen, C. et al. Chemogenomic identification of Ref-1/AP-1 as a therapeutic target for asthma. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 1169–1173 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Weinstein, J. N. & Buolamwini, J. K. Molecular targets in cancer drug discovery: cell-based profiling. Curr. Pharm. Des. 6, 473–483 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Monks, A. et al. Feasibility of a high-flux anticancer drug screen using a diverse panel of cultured human tumor cell lines. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 83, 757–766 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Zheng, X. F. & Chan, T. F. Chemical genomics in the global study of protein functions. Drug Discov. Today 7, 197–205 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Vogelstein, B. & Kinzler, K. W. The multistep nature of cancer. Trends Genet. 9, 138–141 (1993).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Weinstein, I. B. Cancer Addiction to oncogenes — the Achilles heal of cancer. Science 297, 63–64 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Robinson, D. R., Wu, Y. M. & Lin, S. F. The protein tyrosine kinase family of the human genome. Oncogene 19, 5548–5557 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Dan, S. et al. An integrated database of chemosensitivity to 55 anticancer drugs and gene expression profiles of 39 human cancer cell lines. Cancer Res. 62, 1139–1147 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Zembutsu, H. et al. Genome-wide cDNA microarray screening to correlate gene expression profiles with sensitivity of 85 human cancer xenografts to anticancer drugs. Cancer Res. 62, 518–527 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Sotiriou, C. et al. Gene expression profiles derived from fine needle aspiration correlate with response to systemic chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 4, R3 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Wittig, R. et al. Candidate genes for cross-resistance against DNA-damaging drugs. Cancer Res. 62, 6698–6705 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Hoshida, Y. et al. Identification of genes associated with sensitivity to 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin in hepatoma cells. J. Gastroenterol. 37 (Suppl. 14), 92–95 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Kihara, C. et al. Prediction of sensitivity of esophageal tumors to adjuvant chemotherapy by cDNA microarray analysis of gene-expression profiles. Cancer Res. 61, 6474–6479 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Komatani, H. et al. Identification of breast cancer resistant protein/mitoxantrone resistance/placenta-specific, ATP-binding cassette transporter as a transporter of NB-506 and J-107088, topoisomerase I inhibitors with an indolocarbazole structure. Cancer Res. 61, 2827–2832 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Levenson, V. V., Davidovich, I. A. & Roninson, I. B. Pleiotropic resistance to DNA-interactive drugs is associated with increased expression of genes involved in DNA replication, repair, and stress response. Cancer Res. 60, 5027–5030 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Sakamoto, M. et al. Analysis of gene expression profiles associated with cisplatin resistance in human ovarian cancer cell lines and tissues using cDNA microarray. Hum. Cell 14, 305–315 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Turton, N. J. et al. Gene expression and amplification in breast carcinoma cells with intrinsic and acquired doxorubicin resistance. Oncogene 20, 1300–1306 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Vikhanskaya, F., Marchini, S., Marabese, M., Galliera, E. & Broggini, M. p73a overexpression is associated with resistance to treatment with DNA-damaging agents in a human ovarian cancer cell line. Cancer Res. 61, 935–938 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Weldon, C. B. et al. Identification of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase as a chemoresistant pathway in MCF-7 cells by using gene expression microarray. Surgery 132, 293–301 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Watts, G. S. et al. cDNA microarray analysis of multidrug resistance: doxorubicin selection produces multiple defects in apoptosis signaling pathways. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 299, 434–441 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Duan, Z., Feller, A. J., Penson, R. T., Chabner, B. A. & Seiden, M. V. Discovery of differentially expressed genes associated with paclitaxel resistance using cDNA array technology: analysis of interleukin (IL) 6, IL-8, and monocyte chemotactic protein 1 in the paclitaxel-resistant phenotype. Clin. Cancer Res. 5, 3445–3453 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kudoh, K. et al. Monitoring the expression profiles of doxorubicin-induced and doxorubicin-resistant cancer cells by cDNA microarray. Cancer Res. 60, 4161–4166 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Maxwell, P. J. et al. Identification of 5-fluorouracil-inducible target genes using cDNA microarray profiling. Cancer Res. 63, 4602–4606 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Scherf, U. et al. A gene expression database for the molecular pharmacology of cancer. Nature Genet. 24, 236–244 (2000). This paper has pioneered the large-scale analysis of the relationship between patterns of gene expression and patterns of anticancer drug activity, thereby directly linking bioinformatics and chemoinformatics.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Staunton, J. E. et al. Chemosensitivity prediction by transcriptional profiling. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 10787–10792 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Ross, D. T. et al. Systematic variation in gene expression patterns in human cancer cell lines. Nature Genet. 24, 227–235 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Weinstein, J. N. et al. An information-intensive approach to the molecular pharmacology of cancer. Science 275, 343–349 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Bao, L., Guo, T. & Sun, Z. Mining functional relationships in feature subspaces from gene expression profiles and drug activity profiles. FEBS Lett. 516, 113–118 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Moriyama, M. et al. Relevance network between chemosensitivity and transcriptome in human hepatoma cells. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2, 199–205 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Butte, A. J., Tamayo, P., Slonim, D., Golub, T. R. & Kohane, I. S. Discovering functional relationships between RNA expression and chemotherapeutic susceptibility using relevance networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 12182–12186 (2000). Describes a method that allows a gene to be linked to several other genes as well as to phenotypic measures of drug susceptibility through the construction of a chemical genetic network.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Wallqvist, A., Rabow, A. A., Shoemaker, R. H., Sausville, E. A. & Covell, D. G. Establishing connections between microarray expression data and chemotherapeutic cancer pharmacology. Mol. Cancer Ther. 1, 311–320 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Blower, P. E. et al. Pharmacogenomic analysis: correlating molecular substructure classes with microarray gene expression data. Pharmacogenomics J. 2, 259–271 (2002). The authors present a model that allows systematic and fluent exploration of the relationships between the structural features of a compound and global gene expression.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Gygi, S. P., Rochon, Y., Franza, B. R. & Aebersold, R. Correlation between protein and mRNA abundance in yeast. Mol. Cell Biol. 19, 1720–1730 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Bleicher, K. H., Bohm, H. J., Muller, K. & Alanine, A. I. Hit and lead generation: beyond high-throughput screening. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 369–378 (2003). Describes the process from hit to lead generation in a modern industrial setup and focuses on the role of quality versus quantity to improve the attrition rates at later stages of drug development.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Cramer, R. D., Patterson, D. E. & Bunce, J. D. Recent advances in comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 291, 161–165 (1989).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Rusinko, A., Farmen, M. W., Lambert, C. G., Brown, P. L. & Young, S. S. Analysis of a large structure/biological activity data set using recursive partitioning. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39, 1017–1026 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Nicolaou, C. A., Tamura, S. Y., Kelley, B. P., Bassett, S. I. & Nutt, R. F. Analysis of large screening data sets via adaptively grown phylogenetic-like trees. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 42, 1069–1079 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Labute, P. Binary QSAR: a new method for the determination of quantitative structure activity relationships. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 444–455 (1999).

  85. Stanton, D. T., Morris, T. W., Roychoudhury, S. & Parker, C. N. Application of nearest-neighbor and cluster analyses in pharmaceutical lead discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39, 21–27 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Hopfinger, A. J. & Duca, J. S. Extraction of pharmacophore information from high-throughput screens. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 11, 97–103 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Gedeck, P. & Willett, P. Visual and computational analysis of structure–activity relationships in high-throughput screening data. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 5, 389–395 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Engels, M. F. Creating knowledge from high-throughput screening data. Ernst Schering Res. Found. Workshop, 87–101 (2003).

  89. Raymond, J. W. & Willett, P. Maximum common subgraph isomorphism algorithms for the matching of chemical structures. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 16, 521–533 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Roberts, G., Myatt, G. J., Johnson, W. P., Cross, K. P. & Blower, P. E. Jr. LeadScope: software for exploring large sets of screening data. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 40, 1302–1314 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Agrafiotis, D. K., Lobanov, V. S. & Salemme, F. R. Combinatorial informatics in the post-genomics ERA. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 337–346 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Lan, N., Montelione, G. T. & Gerstein, M. Ontologies for proteomics: towards a systematic definition of structure and function that scales to the genome level. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 7, 44–54 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Stevens, R., Goble, C. A. & Bechhofer, S. Ontology-based knowledge representation for bioinformatics. Brief. Bioinform. 1, 398–414 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Karp, P. D. An ontology for biological function based on molecular interactions. Bioinformatics 16, 269–285 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Koch, M. A., Breinbauer, R. & Waldmann, H. Protein structure similarity as guiding principle for combinatorial library design. Biol. Chem. 384, 1265–1272 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Glen, R. Developing tools and standards in molecular informatics. Interview by Susan Aldridge. Chem. Commun. (Camb.) 2745–2747 (2002).

  97. Strausberg, R. L. & Schreiber, S. L. From knowing to controlling: a path from genomics to drugs using small molecule probes. Science 300, 294–295 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nature Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Ji, Z. L. et al. Drug Adverse Reaction Target Database (DART): proteins related to adverse drug reactions. Drug Saf. 26, 685–690 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Sun, L. Z., Ji, Z. L., Chen, X., Wang, J. F. & Chen, Y. Z. ADME-AP: a database of ADME associated proteins. Bioinformatics 18, 1699–1700 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Ji, Z. L. et al. Internet resources for proteins associated with drug therapeutic effects, adverse reactions and ADME. Drug Discov. Today 8, 526–529 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Chen, X., Ji, Z. L. & Chen, Y. Z. TTD: Therapeutic Target Database. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 412–415 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  103. Caron, P. R. et al. Chemogenomic approaches to drug discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 5, 464–470 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Mitchison, T. J. Towards a pharmacological genetics. Chem. Biol. 1, 3–6 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Zheng, X. F. & Chan, T. F. Chemical genomics: a systematic approach in biological research and drug discovery. Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. 4, 33–43 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Sehgal, A. Drug discovery and development using chemical genomics. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 5, 526–531 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Pearson, W. R. & Lipman, D. J. Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 85, 2444–24448 (1988).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  108. Duckworth, D. M. & Sanseau, P. In silico identification of novel therapeutic targets. Drug Discov. Today 7, S64–S69 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W. & Lipman, D. J. Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215, 403–410 (1990).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Lehmann, J. et al. Redesigning drug discovery. Nature 384 (Suppl.), 1–5 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  111. Murcko, M. & Caron, P. Transforming the genome to drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 7, 583–584 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Schuffenhauer, A., Floersheim, P., Acklin, P. & Jacoby, E. Similarity metrics for ligands reflecting the similarity of the target proteins. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43, 391–405 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Jacoby, E. A novel chemogenomics knowledge-based ligand design strategy — application to G protein-coupled receptors. Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationships 20, 115–123 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  114. New, D. C., Miller-Martini, D. M. & Wong, Y. H. Reporter gene assays and their applications to bioassays of natural products. Phytother. Res. 17, 439–448 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Boland, M. V. & Murphy, R. F. Automated analysis of patterns in fluorescence-microscope images. Trends Cell Biol. 9, 201–202 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Frye, S. V. Structure–activity relationship homology (SARAH): a conceptual framework for drug discovery in the genomic era. Chem. Biol. 6, R3–R7 (1999). This fundamental article introduces the 'structure–activity relationship homology' concept, which is the baseline for carrying out target-family reverse chemogenomics.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Krejsa, C. M. et al. Predicting ADME properties and side effects: the BioPrint approach. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 6, 470–480 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Bajorath, J. Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 882–894 (2002). This review article covers the current concepts that are involved in integrating both virtual and high-throughput screening.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Langer, T. & Krovat, E. M. Chemical feature-based pharmacophores and virtual library screening for discovery of new leads. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 6, 370–376 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Xue, L. & Bajorath, J. Molecular descriptors in chemoinformatics, computational combinatorial chemistry, and virtual screening. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 3, 363–372 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Glen, R. C. & Allen, S. C. Ligand-protein docking: cancer research at the interface between biology and chemistry. Curr. Med. Chem. 10, 763–767 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Abagyan, R. & Totrov, M. High-throughput docking for lead generation. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 5, 375–382 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Jenkins, J. L. & Shapiro, R. Identification of small-molecule inhibitors of human angiogenin and characterization of their binding interactions guided by computational docking. Biochemistry 42, 6674–6687 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Schapira, M. et al. Discovery of diverse thyroid hormone receptor antagonists by high-throughput docking. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 7354–7359 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  125. Vangrevelinghe, E. et al. Discovery of a potent and selective protein kinase CK2 inhibitor by high-throughput docking. J. Med. Chem. 46, 2656–2662 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Schneider, G. & Bohm, H. J. Virtual screening and fast automated docking methods. Drug Discov. Today 7, 64–70 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Lamb, M. L. et al. Design, docking, and evaluation of multiple libraries against multiple targets. Proteins 42, 296–318 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Chen, X., Ung, C. Y. & Chen, Y. Can an in silico drug-target search method be used to probe potential mechanisms of medicinal plant ingredients? Nat. Prod. Rep. 20, 432–44 (2003). Describes the application of high-throughput docking for identifying drug targets in an automated fashion. The entire PDB protein structure repertoire is docked against selected natural products. Predictions for their mechanism of action are successfully made.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Gunther, J., Bergner, A., Hendlich, M. & Klebe, G. Utilising structural knowledge in drug design strategies: applications using Relibase. J. Mol. Biol. 326, 621–636 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Michalovich, D., Overington, J. & Fagan, R. Protein sequence analysis in silico: application of structure-based bioinformatics to genomic initiatives. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 2, 574–580 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Jacoby, E., Schuffenhauer, A. & Floersheim, P. Chemogenomics knowledge-based strategies in drug discovery. Drug News Perspect. 16, 93–102 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Schuffenhauer, A. et al. An ontology for pharmaceutical ligands and its application for in silico screening and library design. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 42, 947–955 (2002). Provides a foundation for linking the fields of chemoinformatics and bioinformatics by establishing ligand-discovery ontologies. The application for similarity searching and focused library design are highlighted.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Meng, L., Kwok, B. H., Sin, N. & Crews, C. M. Eponemycin exerts its antitumor effect through the inhibition of proteasome function. Cancer Res. 59, 2798–2801 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Kino, T. et al. FK-506, a novel immunosuppressant isolated from a Streptomyces. II. Immunosuppressive effect of FK-506 in vitro. J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 40, 1256–1265 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  135. Kino, T. et al. FK-506, a novel immunosuppressant isolated from a Streptomyces. I. Fermentation, isolation, and physico-chemical and biological characteristics. J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 40, 1249–1255 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  136. Mirzoeva, S. et al. Screening in a cell-based assay for inhibitors of microglial nitric oxide production reveals calmodulin-regulated protein kinases as potential drug discovery targets. Brain Res. 844, 126–134 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Barrie, S. E. et al. High-throughput screening for the identification of small-molecule inhibitors of retinoblastoma protein phosphorylation in cells. Anal. Biochem. 320, 66–74 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  138. Lukas, T. J., Mirzoeva, S., Slomczynska, U. & Watterson, D. M. Identification of novel classes of protein kinase inhibitors using combinatorial peptide chemistry based on functional genomics knowledge. J. Med. Chem. 42, 910–919 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Liu, Y. et al. Discovery of inhibitors that elucidate the role of UCH-L1 activity in the H1299 lung cancer cell line. Chem. Biol. 10, 837–846 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Wittich, S. et al. Structure–activity relationships on phenylalanine-containing inhibitors of histone deacetylase: in vitro enzyme inhibition, induction of differentiation, and inhibition of proliferation in Friend leukemic cells. J. Med. Chem. 45, 3296–3309 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Mai, A. et al. Binding mode analysis of 3-(4-benzoyl-1-methyl-1H-2-pyrrolyl)-N-hydroxy-2-propenamide: a new synthetic histone deacetylase inhibitor inducing histone hyperacetylation, growth inhibition, and terminal cell differentiation. J. Med. Chem. 45, 1778–1784 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Kao, R. Y. et al. A small-molecule inhibitor of the ribonucleolytic activity of human angiogenin that possesses antitumor activity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 10066–10071 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  143. Jenkins, J. L., Kao, R. Y. & Shapiro, R. Virtual screening to enrich hit lists from high-throughput screening: a case study on small-molecule inhibitors of angiogenin. Proteins 50, 81–93 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Efferth, T. et al. Molecular modes of action of artesunate in tumor cell lines. Mol. Pharmacol. 64, 382–394 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

P. Acklin, H.-J. Roth, P. Schoeffter, A. Schuffenhauer and J. Zimmermann (Novartis) are acknowledged for various support and discussions. M.B. is supported by the Emmy Noether Programme of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 269 Campus Drive, CCSR-1110, Stanford, 94305-5151, California, USA

    Markus Bredel

  2. Department of General Neurosurgery — Neurocenter, University of Freiburg, Breisacher Str. 64, Freiburg, D-79106, Germany

    Markus Bredel

  3. Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Discovery Technologies, Molecular and Library Informatics Program, Basel, CH-4002, Switzerland

    Edgar Jacoby

Authors
  1. Markus Bredel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edgar Jacoby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus Bredel.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Related links

Related links

DATABASES

NCBI

AP1

ATP citrate lyase

HSP90

FURTHER INFORMATION

Cerep Discovery™

Developmental Therapeutics Program, National Cancer Institute

Eidogen

Iconix Pharmaceuticals DrugMatrix™

Inpharmatica

Kensington InforSense

Protein Data Bank

Scitegic Pipeline pilot

Glossary

TRANSCRIPTIONAL PROFILING

The study of the transcriptome — the complete set of RNA transcripts that are produced by the genome at any one time — using high-throughput methods, such as microarray analysis.

COMBINATORIAL CHEMISTRY

A process for preparing large collections of compounds, or 'combinatorial libraries', by synthesizing all possible combinations of a set of smaller chemical structures or 'building blocks'.

COMPOUND LIBRARY

A structurally diverse collection of chemical molecules, typically containing several hundred thousand entities, that is used to identify new lead candidates.

SYNTHETIC CHEMISTRY

A branch of chemistry that focuses on the deliberate manufacture of pure compounds of defined structure and/or the development of new chemical reactions for this purpose.

CHEMOINFORMATICS

A generic term that encompasses the design, creation, organization, management, retrieval, analysis, dissemination, visualization and use of chemical information, with the intended purpose of guiding drug discovery and development.

FOCUSED LIBRARY

Compound libraries that are enriched for desired properties, such as target-binding affinity, by using computational library design methods.

HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING

The large-scale, trial-and-error evaluation of compounds in a parallel target-based or cell-based assay.

CYTOBLOT

A cellular immunoassay that uses primary antibodies to gauge specific post-translational changes, such as the abundance, modification or conformational change of a protein, as a surrogate measure of a phenotypic change of interest.

AFFINITY MATRIX PURIFICATION

Purification of targets on the basis of their interactions with a ligand that is attached to an immobilized matrix, such as agarose beads, to form an affinity column.

PHAGE DISPLAY

A technique that fuses foreign peptides to capsid proteins on the phage surface. Immobilized libraries of phage-displayed peptides might be screened for binding to specific ligands; determination of the gene sequence of the selected phage identifies the peptide sequence.

PROTEOMIC PROFILING

The systematic analysis of protein expression of normal and diseased tissues that involves the separation, identification and characterization of proteins that are present in a biological sample.

PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES

The characteristics of a compound that are relevant to pharmacokinetics studies, such as solubility or membrane permeability.

DRUG-LIKENESS

The concept that drugs share specific molecular properties that distinguish them from other natural or synthetic chemicals.

LEAD OPTIMIZATION

The concurrent optimization of many pharmacological design features, such as target-binding affinity and selectivity, by iterative design, synthesis and testing in biological model systems.

QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE–ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP

(QSAR). An analysis that describes the association between the molecular structure of a compound and its ability to affect a biological target.

LIGAND-INDUCED CONFORMATIONAL STABILIZATION

A phenomenon in which substrates, inhibitors, cofactors and even other proteins provide enhanced stability to proteins on binding.

MASS SPECTROMETRY

A technique that is used to determine the composition and abundance of the atoms in and the molecular mass of complex molecules, starting with a small amount of the sample.

[SYNTHETIC] ANALOGUE

Closely related, synthetically synthesized members of a chemotype — a family of molecules that demonstrate a unique core structure or scaffold — with minor chemical modifications that might show improved target-binding affinity and potency compared with the original natural lead compound.

PHARMACOGENOMICS

The study of how and which variations in the human genome affect the response to medications.

ULTRA HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING

Screening activity that is accelerated to more than 100,000 tests per day.

PRIVILEGED STRUCTURE

A core or scaffolding structure that, independent of specific substituents attached to it, imparts a generic activity towards a protein family or a subset of such a family.

DIVERSITY SET [LIBRARY]

Diversity-orientated synthesis-based libraries augment the accessible structural diversity of the library by mimicking the structural complexity and diversity of natural products.

BOOTSTRAP [ANALYSIS]

A type of statistical analysis that is used to test the reliability of certain branches in the evolutionary tree. The bootstrap analysis proceeds by re-sampling the original data, with replacement, to create a series of bootstrap samples of the same size as the original data. The bootstrap value of a node is the percentage of times that a node is present in the set of trees that is constructed from the new data sets.

MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROME

One of a group of disorders of the bone marrow that is characterized by the abnormal development of one or more of the cell lines that are normally found in bone marrow, leading to anaemia, abnormally low white blood cell count, tendency to infection and bleeding problems.

DESCRIPTOR

A metric that is used to numerically describe a structure or other molecular attributes of a chemical compound.

RELEVANCE NETWORK ANALYSIS

An analysis technique that is used to find functional genomic clusters by initially linking all genes in a data set by comprehensive pair-wise mutual information and then isolating clusters of genes by removing links that fall under a threshold.

ADMET PROPERTIES [AND MECHANISMS]

The absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion and toxicity (ADMET) are fundamental pharmacokinetic properties that determine the in vivo efficacy of a drug, together with its intrinsic biological activity on the target.

RECURSIVE PARTITIONING

A process for identifying complex structure–activity relationships in large sets by dividing compounds into a hierarchy of smaller and more homogeneous subgroups on the basis of the statistically most significant descriptor, such as structure fragments.

PHYLOGENETIC-LIKE TREE ALGORITHM

A method for analysing a data set of molecules that assists in identifying chemical classes of interest and sets of molecular features that correlate with a specified biological feature by combining elements of neural nets, genetic algorithms and substructure analysis.

BINARY QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE–ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP

A method to assign probabilities of activity to compounds by establishing associations between structural features and molecular properties of these compounds and their biological activities.

PARSING

A process by which programming data is broken into smaller, more distinct chunks of information that can be more easily interpreted and acted on.

INTEGRATION PLATFORMS

A software system that connects different data domains and analysis applications under one graphical user interface.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bredel, M., Jacoby, E. Chemogenomics: an emerging strategy for rapid target and drug discovery. Nat Rev Genet 5, 262–275 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1317

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1317

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing