» Articles » PMID: 21486481

A Theoretical Entropy Score As a Single Value to Express Inhibitor Selectivity

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Biology
Date 2011 Apr 14
PMID 21486481
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Designing maximally selective ligands that act on individual targets is the dominant paradigm in drug discovery. Poor selectivity can underlie toxicity and side effects in the clinic, and for this reason compound selectivity is increasingly monitored from very early on in the drug discovery process. To make sense of large amounts of profiling data, and to determine when a compound is sufficiently selective, there is a need for a proper quantitative measure of selectivity.

Results: Here we propose a new theoretical entropy score that can be calculated from a set of IC(50) data. In contrast to previous measures such as the 'selectivity score', Gini score, or partition index, the entropy score is non-arbitary, fully exploits IC(50) data, and is not dependent on a reference enzyme. In addition, the entropy score gives the most robust values with data from different sources, because it is less sensitive to errors. We apply the new score to kinase and nuclear receptor profiling data, and to high-throughput screening data. In addition, through analyzing profiles of clinical compounds, we show quantitatively that a more selective kinase inhibitor is not necessarily more drug-like.

Conclusions: For quantifying selectivity from panel profiling, a theoretical entropy score is the best method. It is valuable for studying the molecular mechanisms of selectivity, and to steer compound progression in drug discovery programs.

Citing Articles

Advancing drug discovery through assay development: a survey of tool compounds within the human solute carrier superfamily.

Digles D, Ingles-Prieto A, Dvorak V, Mocking T, Goldmann U, Garofoli A Front Pharmacol. 2024; 15:1401599.

PMID: 39050757 PMC: 11267547. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1401599.


Death by a thousand cuts through kinase inhibitor combinations that maximize selectivity and enable rational multitargeting.

Outhwaite I, Singh S, Berger B, Knapp S, Chodera J, Seeliger M Elife. 2023; 12.

PMID: 38047771 PMC: 10769483. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.86189.


Accurate breast cancer diagnosis using a stable feature ranking algorithm.

Yu S, Jin M, Wen T, Zhao L, Zou X, Liang X BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023; 23(1):64.

PMID: 37024893 PMC: 10080822. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-023-02142-2.


Target-specific compound selectivity for multi-target drug discovery and repurposing.

Wang T, Pulkkinen O, Aittokallio T Front Pharmacol. 2022; 13:1003480.

PMID: 36225560 PMC: 9549418. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.1003480.


Is Structure-Based Drug Design Ready for Selectivity Optimization?.

Albanese S, Chodera J, Volkamer A, Keng S, Abel R, Wang L J Chem Inf Model. 2020; 60(12):6211-6227.

PMID: 33119284 PMC: 8310368. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00815.


References
1.
Manning G, Whyte D, Martinez R, Hunter T, Sudarsanam S . The protein kinase complement of the human genome. Science. 2002; 298(5600):1912-34. DOI: 10.1126/science.1075762. View

2.
Scapin G . Protein kinase inhibition: different approaches to selective inhibitor design. Curr Drug Targets. 2006; 7(11):1443-54. DOI: 10.2174/1389450110607011443. View

3.
Raaijmakers H, Versteegh J, Uitdehaag J . The X-ray structure of RU486 bound to the progesterone receptor in a destabilized agonistic conformation. J Biol Chem. 2009; 284(29):19572-9. PMC: 2740583. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M109.007872. View

4.
Fischmann T, Smith C, Mayhood T, Myers J, Reichert P, Mannarino A . Crystal structures of MEK1 binary and ternary complexes with nucleotides and inhibitors. Biochemistry. 2009; 48(12):2661-74. DOI: 10.1021/bi801898e. View

5.
Bourguet W, Vivat V, Wurtz J, Chambon P, Gronemeyer H, Moras D . Crystal structure of a heterodimeric complex of RAR and RXR ligand-binding domains. Mol Cell. 2000; 5(2):289-98. DOI: 10.1016/s1097-2765(00)80424-4. View