{"title":"Grand Challenges of Computer-Aided Drug Design: The Road Ahead","authors":"J. Medina‐Franco","doi":"10.3389/fddsv.2021.728551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Computer-aided drug discovery (CADD) has become an essential part of several projects in different settings and research environments. CADD has largely contributed to identifying and optimizing hit compounds leading them to advanced stages of the drug discovery pipeline or the market (PrietoMartínez et al., 2019). CADD includes several theoretical disciplines, including chemoinformatics, bioinformatics, molecular modeling, and data mining, among others (López-López et al., 2021). Artificial intelligence (AI) that has been used since the 60 s (Gasteiger, 2020) in drug discovery is regaining momentum, in particular with machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) (Bajorath, 2021; Bender and Cortés-Ciriano, 2021). In parallel to the continued contribution of CADD, several methodologies used in CADD have entered the hype cycle with waives of hope, inflated expectations, disappointments, and productive applications. The disillusionments are frequently driven by fashion, exacerbated misuse, and a lack of proper training to interpret the results (MedinaFranco et al., 2021). Examples are quantitative structure-activity relationship studies (QSAR). A few decades ago, there was a hype for QSAR studies; but uneducated use, bad practices, and poor reporting led to inflated expectations and disappointment (Johnson, 2008). As part of the hype, scientific journals containing the word “QSAR” in the title emerged, and years later, some journals were re-named. Molecular docking is another example of a method that is often misused, leading to false expectations and disappointments, not because the technique is not useful but because it is tried to be used for purposes that was not initially designed (e.g., correlation of docking cores with experimental binding affinities). At the time of writing this manuscript, there is a hype for AI, ML, DL; quoting Bajorath, an “AI ecstasy” (Bajorath, 2021). Despite the contributions of CADD in different stages of the drug discovery pipelines and technological advances, there are challenges that need to be addressed. Table 1 outlines the grand challenges that face drug discovery using in silicomethods and AI and are further commented on in this manuscript. The list of topics is not exhaustive; the selected challenges are based on the author’s opinion, and it is intended to be a reference for a continued update. Here, the challenges are organized into six sections. The first two are related to the chemical and biological relevant chemical spaces, respectively; that is, what spaces are being explored? Another section covers methodological challenges: how is being conducted the search for new and better drugs at the intersection of the relevant chemical and biological spaces? The next three sections present hurdles associated with communication and Human interaction in research teams, scientific dissemination, data sharing, and education, respectively. The last section contains the Conclusions.","PeriodicalId":73080,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in drug discovery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in drug discovery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fddsv.2021.728551","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19
Abstract
Computer-aided drug discovery (CADD) has become an essential part of several projects in different settings and research environments. CADD has largely contributed to identifying and optimizing hit compounds leading them to advanced stages of the drug discovery pipeline or the market (PrietoMartínez et al., 2019). CADD includes several theoretical disciplines, including chemoinformatics, bioinformatics, molecular modeling, and data mining, among others (López-López et al., 2021). Artificial intelligence (AI) that has been used since the 60 s (Gasteiger, 2020) in drug discovery is regaining momentum, in particular with machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) (Bajorath, 2021; Bender and Cortés-Ciriano, 2021). In parallel to the continued contribution of CADD, several methodologies used in CADD have entered the hype cycle with waives of hope, inflated expectations, disappointments, and productive applications. The disillusionments are frequently driven by fashion, exacerbated misuse, and a lack of proper training to interpret the results (MedinaFranco et al., 2021). Examples are quantitative structure-activity relationship studies (QSAR). A few decades ago, there was a hype for QSAR studies; but uneducated use, bad practices, and poor reporting led to inflated expectations and disappointment (Johnson, 2008). As part of the hype, scientific journals containing the word “QSAR” in the title emerged, and years later, some journals were re-named. Molecular docking is another example of a method that is often misused, leading to false expectations and disappointments, not because the technique is not useful but because it is tried to be used for purposes that was not initially designed (e.g., correlation of docking cores with experimental binding affinities). At the time of writing this manuscript, there is a hype for AI, ML, DL; quoting Bajorath, an “AI ecstasy” (Bajorath, 2021). Despite the contributions of CADD in different stages of the drug discovery pipelines and technological advances, there are challenges that need to be addressed. Table 1 outlines the grand challenges that face drug discovery using in silicomethods and AI and are further commented on in this manuscript. The list of topics is not exhaustive; the selected challenges are based on the author’s opinion, and it is intended to be a reference for a continued update. Here, the challenges are organized into six sections. The first two are related to the chemical and biological relevant chemical spaces, respectively; that is, what spaces are being explored? Another section covers methodological challenges: how is being conducted the search for new and better drugs at the intersection of the relevant chemical and biological spaces? The next three sections present hurdles associated with communication and Human interaction in research teams, scientific dissemination, data sharing, and education, respectively. The last section contains the Conclusions.
计算机辅助药物发现(CADD)已成为不同环境和研究环境下几个项目的重要组成部分。CADD在很大程度上有助于识别和优化命中化合物,使其进入药物发现管道或市场的高级阶段(PrietoMartínez等人,2019)。CADD包括几个理论学科,包括化学信息学、生物信息学、分子建模和数据挖掘等(López-López et al.,2021)。自60年代以来一直在药物发现中使用的人工智能(AI)(Gasteiger,2020)正在恢复势头,特别是在机器学习(ML)和深度学习(DL)方面(Bajorath,2021;Bender和Cortés-Ciriano,2021)。在CADD持续贡献的同时,CADD中使用的几种方法也进入了炒作周期,放弃了希望、夸大了期望、失望和富有成效的应用。幻想破灭往往是由时尚、滥用加剧以及缺乏适当的培训来解释结果所驱动的(MedinaFranco等人,2021)。定量构效关系研究(QSAR)就是一个例子。几十年前,QSAR研究大肆宣传;但未经教育的使用、不良做法和糟糕的报告导致了期望值的膨胀和失望(Johnson,2008)。作为炒作的一部分,标题中包含“QSAR”一词的科学期刊出现了,几年后,一些期刊被重新命名。分子对接是另一个经常被滥用的方法,导致错误的期望和失望,不是因为该技术没有用处,而是因为它试图用于最初没有设计的目的(例如,对接核心与实验结合亲和力的相关性)。在写这篇手稿的时候,有一个关于AI、ML、DL的炒作;引用Bajorath的话,一种“人工智能的狂喜”(Bajorath,2021)。尽管CADD在药物发现管道和技术进步的不同阶段做出了贡献,但仍有一些挑战需要解决。表1概述了使用计算机方法和人工智能进行药物发现所面临的巨大挑战,并在本文中进行了进一步评论。专题清单并非详尽无遗;所选择的挑战是基于作者的意见,旨在作为持续更新的参考。在这里,挑战分为六个部分。前两个分别与化学和生物相关的化学空间有关;也就是说,正在探索哪些空间?另一节介绍了方法上的挑战:如何在相关化学和生物空间的交叉点上寻找新的更好的药物?接下来的三节分别介绍了研究团队、科学传播、数据共享和教育中与沟通和人际互动相关的障碍。最后一节包含结论。