Death by a Thousand Cuts – Combining Kinase Inhibitors for Selective Target Inhibition and Rational Polypharmacology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Kinase inhibitors are successful therapeutics in the treatment of cancers and autoimmune diseases and are useful tools in biomedical research. The high sequence and structural conservation of the catalytic kinase domain complicates the development of specific kinase inhibitors. As a consequence, most kinase inhibitors also inhibit off-target kinases which complicates the interpretation of phenotypic responses. Additionally, inhibition of off-targets may cause toxicity in patients. Therefore, highly selective kinase inhibition is a major goal in both biomedical research and clinical practice. Currently, efforts to improve selective kinase inhibition are dominated by the development of new kinase inhibitors. Here, we present an alternative solution to this problem by combining inhibitors with divergent off-target activities. We have developed a multicompound-multitarget scoring (MMS) method framework that combines inhibitors to maximize target inhibition and to minimize off-target inhibition. Additionally, this framework enables rational polypharmacology by allowing optimization of inhibitor combinations against multiple selected on-targets and off-targets. Using MMS with previously published chemogenomic kinase inhibitor datasets we determine inhibitor combinations that achieve potent activity against a target kinase and that are more selective than the most selective single inhibitor against that target. We validate the calculated effect and selectivity of a combination of inhibitors using the in cellulo NanoBRET assay. The MMS framework is generalizable to other pharmacological targets where compound specificity is a challenge and diverse compound libraries are available.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".