Introduction to Fragment-Based Drug Discovery

Part of the Topics in Current Chemistry book series (TOPCURRCHEM, volume 317)

Abstract

Fragment-based drug discovery (FBDD) has emerged in the past decade as a powerful tool for discovering drug leads. The approach first identifies starting points: very small molecules (fragments) that are about half the size of typical drugs. These fragments are then expanded or linked together to generate drug leads. Although the origins of the technique date back some 30 years, it was only in the mid-1990s that experimental techniques became sufficiently sensitive and rapid for the concept to be become practical. Since that time, the field has exploded: FBDD has played a role in discovery of at least 18 drugs that have entered the clinic, and practitioners of FBDD can be found throughout the world in both academia and industry. Literally dozens of reviews have been published on various aspects of FBDD or on the field as a whole, as have three books (Jahnke and Erlanson, Fragment-based approaches in drug discovery, 2006; Zartler and Shapiro, Fragment-based drug discovery: a practical approach, 2008; Kuo, Fragment based drug design: tools, practical approaches, and examples, 2011). However, this chapter will assume that the reader is approaching the field with little prior knowledge. It will introduce some of the key concepts, set the stage for the chapters to follow, and demonstrate how X-ray crystallography plays a central role in fragment identification and advancement.

Keywords

Fragment-based drug discovery Fragment-based lead discovery Fragment-based screening Kinase Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy Structure-based drug design X-ray crystallography 

Notes

Acknowledgment

I would like to thank Monya Baker for a careful reading of the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Adams D (1980) The hitchhiker’s guide to the galaxy, 1st American edn. Harmony Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bohacek RS, McMartin C, Guida WC (1996) The art and practice of structure-based drug design: a molecular modeling perspective. Med Res Rev 16:3–50Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hann MM, Oprea TI (2004) Pursuing the leadlikeness concept in pharmaceutical research. Curr Opin Chem Biol 8:255–263Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Keseru GM, Makara GM (2009) The influence of lead discovery strategies on the properties of drug candidates. Nat Rev Drug Discov 8:203–212Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wells JA, McClendon CL (2007) Reaching for high-hanging fruit in drug discovery at protein-protein interfaces. Nature 450:1001–1009Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hajduk PJ, Greer J (2007) A decade of fragment-based drug design: strategic advances and lessons learned. Nat Rev Drug Discov 6:211–219Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fink T, Reymond JL (2007) Virtual exploration of the chemical universe up to 11 atoms of C, N, O, F: assembly of 26.4 million structures (110.9 million stereoisomers) and analysis for new ring systems, stereochemistry, physicochemical properties, compound classes, and drug discovery. J Chem Inf Model 47:342–353Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jencks WP (1981) On the attribution and additivity of binding energies. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 78:4046–4050Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shuker SB, Hajduk PJ, Meadows RP et al (1996) Discovering high-affinity ligands for proteins: SAR by NMR. Science 274:1531–1534Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chung S, Parker JB, Bianchet M et al (2009) Impact of linker strain and flexibility in the design of a fragment-based inhibitor. Nat Chem Biol 5:407–413Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Huth JR, Park C, Petros AM et al (2007) Discovery and design of novel HSP90 inhibitors using multiple fragment-based design strategies. Chem Biol Drug Des 70:1–12Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Whittaker M (2009) Picking up the pieces with FBDD or FADD: invest early for future success. Drug Discov Today 14:623–624Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hann MM, Leach AR, Harper G (2001) Molecular complexity and its impact on the probability of finding leads for drug discovery. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 41:856–864Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rishton GM (2003) Nonleadlikeness and leadlikeness in biochemical screening. Drug Discov Today 8:86–96Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baell JB, Holloway GA (2010) New substructure filters for removal of pan assay interference compounds (PAINS) from screening libraries and for their exclusion in bioassays. J Med Chem 53:2719–2740Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baell JB (2010) Observations on screening-based research and some concerning trends in the literature. Future Med Chem 2:1529–1546Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guertin KR, Setti L, Qi L et al (2003) Identification of a novel class of orally active pyrimido[5,4-3][1,2,4]triazine-5,7-diamine-based hypoglycemic agents with protein tyrosine phosphatase inhibitory activity. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 13:2895–2898Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tjernberg A, Hallen D, Schultz J et al (2004) Mechanism of action of pyridazine analogues on protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B). Bioorg Med Chem Lett 14:891–895Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yi F, Regan L (2008) A novel class of small molecule inhibitors of Hsp90. ACS Chem Biol 3:645–654Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lor LA, Schneck J, McNulty DE et al (2007) A simple assay for detection of small-molecule redox activity. J Biomol Screen 12:881–890Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Johnston PA, Soares KM, Shinde SN et al (2008) Development of a 384-well colorimetric assay to quantify hydrogen peroxide generated by the redox cycling of compounds in the presence of reducing agents. Assay Drug Dev Technol 6:505–518Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Soares KM, Blackmon N, Shun TY et al (2010) Profiling the NIH small molecule repository for compounds that generate H2O2 by redox cycling in reducing environments. Assay Drug Dev Technol 8:152–174Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McGovern SL, Caselli E, Grigorieff N et al (2002) A common mechanism underlying promiscuous inhibitors from virtual and high-throughput screening. J Med Chem 45:1712–1722Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Seidler J, McGovern SL, Doman TN et al (2003) Identification and prediction of promiscuous aggregating inhibitors among known drugs. J Med Chem 46:4477–4486Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Babaoglu K, Simeonov A, Irwin JJ et al (2008) Comprehensive mechanistic analysis of hits from high-throughput and docking screens against beta-lactamase. J Med Chem 51:2502–2511Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ferreira RS, Bryant C, Ang KK et al (2009) Divergent modes of enzyme inhibition in a homologous structure-activity series. J Med Chem 52:5005–5008Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Feng BY, Shoichet BK (2006) A detergent-based assay for the detection of promiscuous inhibitors. Nat Protoc 1:550–553Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shoichet BK (2006) Screening in a spirit haunted world. Drug Discov Today 11:607–615Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pellecchia M, Bertini I, Cowburn D et al (2008) Perspectives on NMR in drug discovery: a technique comes of age. Nat Rev Drug Discov 7:738–745Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mayer M, Meyer B (1999) Characterization of ligand binding by saturation transfer difference NMR spectroscopy. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 38:1784–1788Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Becattini B, Culmsee C, Leone M et al (2006) Structure-activity relationships by interligand NOE-based design and synthesis of antiapoptotic compounds targeting Bid. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:12602–12606Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Becattini B, Pellecchia M (2006) SAR by ILOEs: an NMR-based approach to reverse chemical genetics. Chemistry 12:2658–2662Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sledz P, Silvestre HL, Hung AW et al (2010) Optimization of the interligand Overhauser effect for fragment linking: application to inhibitor discovery against Mycobacterium tuberculosis pantothenate synthetase. J Am Chem Soc 132:4544–4545Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vanwetswinkel S, Heetebrij RJ, van Duynhoven J et al (2005) TINS, target immobilized NMR screening: an efficient and sensitive method for ligand discovery. Chem Biol 12:207–216Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fruh V, Zhou Y, Chen D et al (2010) Application of fragment-based drug discovery to membrane proteins: identification of ligands of the integral membrane enzyme DsbB. Chem Biol 17:881–891Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pellecchia M, Becattini B, Crowell KJ et al (2004) NMR-based techniques in the hit identification and optimisation processes. Expert Opin Ther Targets 8:597–611Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zartler ER, Shapiro MJ (2006) Protein NMR-based screening in drug discovery. Curr Pharm Des 12:3963–3972Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sem DS (2006) NMR-guided fragment assembly. In: Jahnke W, Erlanson DA (eds) Fragment-based approaches in drug discovery. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hajduk PJ, Huth JR, Sun C (2006) SAR by NMR: an analysis of potency gains realized through fragment-linking and fragment-elaboration strategies for lead generation. In: Jahnke W, Erlanson DA (eds) Fragment-based approaches in drug discovery. Wiley-VCH, WeinheimGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zartler ER, Mo H (2007) Practical aspects of NMR-based fragment discovery. Curr Top Med Chem 7:1592–1599Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hubbard RE, Davis B, Chen I et al (2007) The SeeDs approach: integrating fragments into drug discovery. Curr Top Med Chem 7:1568–1581Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dalvit C (2009) NMR methods in fragment screening: theory and a comparison with other biophysical techniques. Drug Discov Today 14:1051–1057Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Jhoti H, Cleasby A, Verdonk M et al (2007) Fragment-based screening using X-ray crystallography and NMR spectroscopy. Curr Opin Chem Biol 11:485–493Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kobayashi M, Retra K, Figaroa F et al (2010) Target immobilization as a strategy for NMR-based fragment screening: comparison of TINS, STD, and SPR for fragment hit identification. J Biomol Screen 15:978–989Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gozalbes R, Carbajo RJ, Pineda-Lucena A (2010) Contributions of computational chemistry and biophysical techniques to fragment-based drug discovery. Curr Med Chem 17:1769–1794Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wyss DF, Wang Y-S, Eaton HL, Strickland C, Voigt JH, Zhu Z, Stamford AW (2011) Combining NMR and X-ray crystallography in fragment-based drug discovery: discovery of highly potent and selective BACE-1 inhibitors. Top Curr Chem. doi:10.1007/128_2011_183Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bauman JD, Patel D, Arnold E (2011) Fragment screening and HIV therapeutics. Top Curr Chem. doi:10.1007/128_2011_232Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Davies TG, Tickle IJ (2011) Fragment screening using X-ray crystallography. Top Curr Chem. doi:10.1007/128_2011_179Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hennig M, Ruf A, Huber W (2011) Combining biophysical screening and X-ray crystallography for fragment-based drug discovery. Top Curr Chem. doi:10.1007/128_2011_225Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Davis AM, St-Gallay SA, Kleywegt GJ (2008) Limitations and lessons in the use of X-ray structural information in drug design. Drug Discov Today 13:831–841Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sondergaard CR, Garrett AE, Carstensen T et al (2009) Structural artifacts in protein-ligand X-ray structures: implications for the development of docking scoring functions. J Med Chem 52:5673–5684Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Blaney J, Nienaber V, Burley SK (2006) Fragment-based lead discovery and optimization using X-ray crystallography, computational chemistry, and high-throughput organic synthesis. In: Jahnke W, Erlanson DA (eds) Fragment-based approaches in drug discovery. Wiley-VCH, WeinheimGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Murray CW, Blundell TL (2010) Structural biology in fragment-based drug design. Curr Opin Struct Biol 20:497–507Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rich RL, Myszka DG (2010) Grading the commercial optical biosensor literature-class of 2008: ‘The mighty binders’. J Mol Recognit 23:1–64Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Perspicace S, Banner D, Benz J et al (2009) Fragment-based screening using surface plasmon resonance technology. J Biomol Screen 14:337–349Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Proll F, Fechner P, Proll G (2009) Direct optical detection in fragment-based screening. Anal Bioanal Chem 393:1557–1562Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Navratilova I, Hopkins AL (2010) Fragment screening by surface plasmon resonance. ACS Med Chem Lett 1:44–48Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rich RL, Myszka DG (2010) Kinetic analysis and fragment screening with Fujifilm AP-3000. Anal Biochem 402:170–178Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kreatsoulas C, Narayan K (2010) Algorithms for the automated selection of fragment-like molecules using single-point surface plasmon resonance measurements. Anal Biochem 402:179–184Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Neumann T, Junker HD, Schmidt K et al (2007) SPR-based fragment screening: advantages and applications. Curr Top Med Chem 7:1630–1642Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Concepcion J, Witte K, Wartchow C et al (2009) Label-free detection of biomolecular interactions using biolayer interferometry for kinetic characterization. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 12:791–800Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ladbury JE, Klebe G, Freire E (2010) Adding calorimetric data to decision making in lead discovery: a hot tip. Nat Rev Drug Discov 9:23–27Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Scott AD, Phillips C, Alex A et al (2009) Thermodynamic optimisation in drug discovery: a case study using carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. ChemMedChem 4:1985–1989Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Erlanson DA, Wells JA, Braisted AC (2004) Tethering: fragment-based drug discovery. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 33:199–223Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Hannah V, Atmanene C, Zeyer D et al (2010) Native MS: an ‘ESI’ way to support structure-and fragment-based drug discovery. Future Med Chem 2:35–49Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Barker J, Courtney S, Hesterkamp T et al (2006) Fragment screening by biochemical assay. Expert Opin Drug Discovery 1:225–236Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Slack M, Winkler D, Kramer J et al (2009) A multiplexed approach to hit finding. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 12:351–357Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Godemann R, Madden J, Kramer J et al (2009) Fragment-based discovery of BACE1 inhibitors using functional assays. Biochemistry 48:10743–10751Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Barker JJ, Barker O, Boggio R et al (2009) Fragment-based identification of Hsp90 inhibitors. ChemMedChem 4:963–966Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Tsai J, Lee JT, Wang W et al (2008) Discovery of a selective inhibitor of oncogenic B-Raf kinase with potent antimelanoma activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:3041–3046Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Artis DR, Lin JJ, Zhang C et al (2009) Scaffold-based discovery of indeglitazar, a PPAR pan-active anti-diabetic agent. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:262–267Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Caflisch A, Miranker A, Karplus M (1993) Multiple copy simultaneous search and construction of ligands in binding sites: application to inhibitors of HIV-1 aspartic proteinase. J Med Chem 36:2142–2167Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Teotico DG, Babaoglu K, Rocklin GJ et al (2009) Docking for fragment inhibitors of AmpC beta-lactamase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:7455–7460Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Zoete V, Grosdidier A, Michielin O (2009) Docking, virtual high throughput screening and in silico fragment-based drug design. J Cell Mol Med 13:238–248Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Law R, Barker O, Barker JJ et al (2009) The multiple roles of computational chemistry in fragment-based drug design. J Comput Aided Mol Des 23:459–473Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Albert JS, Blomberg N, Breeze AL et al (2007) An integrated approach to fragment-based lead generation: Philosophy, strategy and case studies from AstraZeneca’s drug discovery programmes. Curr Top Med Chem 7:1600–1629Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Congreve M, Carr R, Murray C et al (2003) A ‘rule of three’ for fragment-based lead discovery? Drug Discov Today 8:876–877Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hopkins AL, Groom CR, Alex A (2004) Ligand efficiency: a useful metric for lead selection. Drug Discov Today 9:430–431Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Hajduk PJ (2006) Fragment-based drug design: how big is too big? J Med Chem 49:6972–6976Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kuntz ID, Chen K, Sharp KA et al (1999) The maximal affinity of ligands. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:9997–10002Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Abad-Zapatero C, Metz G (2005) Ligand efficiency indices as guideposts for drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 10:464–469Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Bembenek SD, Tounge BA, Reynolds CH (2009) Ligand efficiency and fragment-based drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 14:278–283Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Orita M, Ohno K, Niimi T (2009) Two ‘golden ratio’ indices in fragment-based drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 14:321–328Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Erlanson DA, McDowell RS, O’Brien T (2004) Fragment-based drug discovery. J Med Chem 47:3463–3482Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Rees DC, Congreve M, Murray CW et al (2004) Fragment-based lead discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 3:660–672Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Jahnke W, Erlanson DA (eds) (2006) Fragment-based approaches in drug discovery. Methods and principles in medicinal chemistry, vol 34. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Zartler E, Shapiro M (eds) (2008) Fragment-based drug discovery: a practical approach. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Erlanson DA (2006) Fragment-based lead discovery: A chemical update. Curr Opin Biotechnol 17:643–652Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Leach AR, Hann MM, Burrows JN et al (2006) Fragment screening: an introduction. Mol Biosyst 2:430–446Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Ciulli A, Abell C (2007) Fragment-based approaches to enzyme inhibition. Curr Opin Biotechnol 18:489–496Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Fattori D, Squarcia A, Bartoli S (2008) Fragment-based approach to drug lead discovery: overview and advances in various techniques. Drugs R D 9:217–227Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Congreve M, Chessari G, Tisi D et al (2008) Recent developments in fragment-based drug discovery. J Med Chem 51:3661–3680Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Murray CW, Rees DC (2009) The rise of fragment-based drug discovery. Nat Chem 1:187–192Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Schulz MN, Hubbard RE (2009) Recent progress in fragment-based lead discovery. Curr Opin Pharmacol 9:615–621Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    de Kloe GE, Bailey D, Leurs R et al (2009) Transforming fragments into candidates: small becomes big in medicinal chemistry. Drug Discov Today 14:630–646Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Coyne AG, Scott DE, Abell C (2010) Drugging challenging targets using fragment-based approaches. Curr Opin Chem Biol 14:299–307Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Chessari G, Woodhead AJ (2009) From fragment to clinical candidate–a historical perspective. Drug Discov Today 14:668–675Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Erlanson DA (2010) Fragments in the clinic: 2010 edition. In: Practical fragments. http://practicalfragments.blogspot.com/2010/09/fragments-in-clinic-2010-edition.html. Accessed 23 Dec 2010
  99. 99.
    Li R, Stafford JA (eds) (2009) Kinase inhibitor drugs. Wiley series in drug discovery and development. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Akritopoulou-Zanze I, Hajduk PJ (2009) Kinase-targeted libraries: the design and synthesis of novel, potent, and selective kinase inhibitors. Drug Discov Today 14:291–297Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Wyatt PG, Woodhead AJ, Berdini V et al (2008) Identification of N-(4-piperidinyl)-4-(2,6-dichlorobenzoylamino)-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide (AT7519), a novel cyclin dependent kinase inhibitor using fragment-based X-ray crystallography and structure based drug design. J Med Chem 51:4986–4999Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Howard S, Berdini V, Boulstridge JA et al (2009) Fragment-based discovery of the pyrazol-4-yl urea (AT9283), a multitargeted kinase inhibitor with potent aurora kinase activity. J Med Chem 52:379–388Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Erlanson D, Braisted A, Raphael D et al (2000) Site-directed ligand discovery. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:9367–9372Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Mpamhanga CP, Spinks D, Tulloch LB et al (2009) One scaffold, three binding modes: novel and selective pteridine reductase 1 inhibitors derived from fragment hits discovered by virtual screening. J Med Chem 52:4454–4465Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Bollag G, Hirth P, Tsai J et al (2010) Clinical efficacy of a RAF inhibitor needs broad target blockade in BRAF-mutant melanoma. Nature 467:596–599Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Flaherty KT, Puzanov I, Kim KB et al (2010) Inhibition of mutated, activated BRAF in metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363:809–819Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Brough PA, Aherne W, Barril X et al (2008) 4,5-diarylisoxazole Hsp90 chaperone inhibitors: potential therapeutic agents for the treatment of cancer. J Med Chem 51:196–218Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Brough PA, Barril X, Borgognoni J et al (2009) Combining hit identification strategies: fragment-based and in silico approaches to orally active 2-aminothieno[2,3-d]pyrimidine inhibitors of the Hsp90 molecular chaperone. J Med Chem 52:4794–4809Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Roughley S, Wright L, Brough P, Massey A, Hubbard RE (2011) Hsp90 inhibitors and drugs from fragment and virtual screening. Top Curr Chem. doi:10.1007/128_181Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Murray CW, Carr MG, Callaghan O et al (2010) Fragment-based drug discovery applied to Hsp90. Discovery of two lead series with high ligand efficiency. J Med Chem 53:5942–5955Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Woodhead AJ, Angove H, Carr MG et al (2010) Discovery of (2,4-dihydroxy-5-isopropylphenyl)-[5-(4-methylpiperazin-1-ylmethyl)-1,3-di hydroisoindol-2-yl]methanone (AT13387), a novel inhibitor of the molecular chaperone Hsp90 by fragment based drug design. J Med Chem 53:5956–5969Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Hajduk PJ, Sheppard G, Nettesheim DG et al (1997) Discovery of potent nonpeptide inhibitors of stromelysin using SAR by NMR. J Am Chem Soc 119:5818–5827Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Hajduk PJ, Shuker SB, Nettesheim DG et al (2002) NMR-based modification of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors with improved bioavailability. J Med Chem 45:5628–5639Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Wada CK (2004) The evolution of the matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor drug discovery program at Abbott Laboratories. Curr Top Med Chem 4:1255–1267Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Oltersdorf T, Elmore SW, Shoemaker AR et al (2005) An inhibitor of Bcl-2 family proteins induces regression of solid tumours. Nature 435:677–681Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Petros AM, Dinges J, Augeri DJ et al (2006) Discovery of a potent inhibitor of the antiapoptotic protein Bcl-xL from NMR and parallel synthesis. J Med Chem 49:656–663Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Wendt MD, Shen W, Kunzer A et al (2006) Discovery and structure-activity relationship of antagonists of B-cell lymphoma 2 family proteins with chemopotentiation activity in vitro and in vivo. J Med Chem 49:1165–1181Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Bruncko M, Oost TK, Belli BA et al (2007) Studies leading to potent, dual inhibitors of Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL. J Med Chem 50:641–662Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Park CM, Bruncko M, Adickes J et al (2008) Discovery of an orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of prosurvival B-cell lymphoma 2 proteins. J Med Chem 51:6902–6915Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Davies DR, Mamat B, Magnusson OT et al (2009) Discovery of leukotriene A4 hydrolase inhibitors using metabolomics biased fragment crystallography. J Med Chem 52:4694–4715Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Penning TD, Chandrakumar NS, Chen BB et al (2000) Structure-activity relationship studies on 1-[2-(4-phenylphenoxy)ethyl]pyrrolidine (SC-22716), a potent inhibitor of leukotriene A(4) (LTA(4)) hydrolase. J Med Chem 43:721–735Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Sandanayaka V, Mamat B, Mishra RK et al (2010) Discovery of 4-[(2S)-2-{[4-(4-chlorophenoxy)phenoxy]methyl}-1-pyrrolidinyl]butanoic acid (DG-051) as a novel leukotriene A4 hydrolase inhibitor of leukotriene B4 biosynthesis. J Med Chem 53:573–585Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Nienaber VL, Richardson PL, Klighofer V et al (2000) Discovering novel ligands for macromolecules using X-ray crystallographic screening. Nat Biotechnol 18:1105–1108Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Sun C (2010) Targeting the intractable. Oral presentation at: Fragment-based lead discovery conference 2010, Philadelphia, 10–13 October 2010Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Haydon DJ, Stokes NR, Ure R et al (2008) An inhibitor of FtsZ with potent and selective anti-staphylococcal activity. Science 321:1673–1675Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Czaplewski LG, Collins I, Boyd EA et al (2009) Antibacterial alkoxybenzamide inhibitors of the essential bacterial cell division protein FtsZ. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 19:524–527Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carmot Therapeutics, Inc.San FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations