Drugging the ‘undruggable’. Therapeutic targeting of protein–DNA interactions with the use of computer-aided drug discovery methods
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transcription factors (TFs) act as major oncodrivers in many cancers and are frequently regarded as high-value therapeutic targets. The functionality of TFs relies on direct protein-DNA interactions, which are notoriously difficult to target with small molecules. However, this prior view of the 'undruggability' of protein-DNA interfaces has shifted substantially in recent years, in part because of significant advances in computer-aided drug discovery (CADD). In this review, we highlight recent examples of successful CADD campaigns resulting in drug candidates that directly interfere with protein-DNA interactions of several key cancer TFs, including androgen receptor (AR), ETS-related gene (ERG), MYC, thymocyte selection-associated high mobility group box protein (TOX), topoisomerase II (TOP2), and signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3). Importantly, these findings open novel and compelling avenues for therapeutic targeting of over 1600 human TFs implicated in many conditions including and beyond cancer.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it