MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of kinase polypharmacology across HSP90 drug discovery

2021· article· en· W3164768128 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Albert A. Antolín, Paul A. Clarke, Ian Collins, Paul Workman, Bissan Al‐Lazikani

Bibliographic record

VenueCell chemical biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHeat shock proteins research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Cancer ResearchH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsNIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research CentreResearch Executive AgencySeventh Framework ProgrammeMerck Sharp and DohmeAstraZenecaAgència per a la Competitivitat de l’EmpresaGeneralitat de CatalunyaCancer Research UKAstex PharmaceuticalsAstellas PharmaWellcome TrustChordoma FoundationCetacean Research TechnologyMerck KGaA
KeywordsDrug discoveryComputational biologyDrugDrug repositioningHsp90PharmacologyBiologyBioinformaticsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most small molecules interact with several target proteins but this polypharmacology is seldom comprehensively investigated or explicitly exploited during drug discovery. Here, we use computational and experimental methods to identify and systematically characterize the kinase cross-pharmacology of representative HSP90 inhibitors. We demonstrate that the resorcinol clinical candidates ganetespib and, to a lesser extent, luminespib, display unique off-target kinase pharmacology as compared with other HSP90 inhibitors. We also demonstrate that polypharmacology evolved during the optimization to discover luminespib and that the hit, leads, and clinical candidate all have different polypharmacological profiles. We therefore recommend the computational and experimental characterization of polypharmacology earlier in drug discovery projects to unlock new multi-target drug design opportunities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell chemical biologySame topicHeat shock proteins researchFrench-language works237,207