Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32419905›Full record

ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2020

Drug repositioning or target repositioning: A structural perspective of drug-target-indication relationship for available repurposed drugs.

Daniele Parisi, Melissa F Adasme, Anastasia Sveshnikova, Sarah Naomi Bolz, Yves Moreau, Michael Schroeder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Unlocking Novel Therapeutic Potential of Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  20. Pan-cancer analysis and oncogenic implications ofJournal of cell communication and signaling · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Daniele ParisiESAT-STADIUS, KU Leuven, B-3001 Heverlee, Belgium.
Melissa F AdasmeBiotechnology Center (BIOTEC), Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Anastasia SveshnikovaBiotechnology Center (BIOTEC), Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Sarah Naomi BolzESAT-STADIUS, KU Leuven, B-3001 Heverlee, Belgium.
Yves MoreauESAT-STADIUS, KU Leuven, B-3001 Heverlee, Belgium.
Michael SchroederBiotechnology Center (BIOTEC), Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug repositioning aims to find new indications for existing drugs in order to reduce drug development cost and time. Currently,there are numerous stories of successful drug repositioning that have been reported and many repurposed drugs are already available on the market. Although drug repositioning is often a product of serendipity, repositioning opportunities can be uncovered systematically. There are three systematic approaches to drug repositioning: disease-centric approach, target-centric and drug-centric. Disease-centric approaches identify close relationships between an old and a new indication. A target-centric approach links a known target and its established drug to a new indication. Lastly, a drug-centric approach connects a known drug to a new target and its associated indication. These three approaches differ in their potential and their limitations, but above all else, in the required start information and computing power. This raises the question of which approach prevails in current drug discovery and what that implies for future developments. To address this question, we systematically evaluated over 100 drugs, 200 target structures and over 300 indications from the Drug Repositioning Database. Each analyzed case was classified as one of the three repositioning approaches. For the majority of cases (more than 60%) the disease-centric definition was assigned. Almost 30% of the cases were classified as target-centric and less than 10% as drug-centric approaches. We concluded that, despite the use of umbrella term "drug" repositioning, disease- and target-centric approaches have dominated the field until now. We propose the use of drug-centric approaches while discussing reasons, such as structure-based repositioning techniques, to exploit the full potential of drug-target-disease connections.

Indexed as

Drug repositioningDrug repurposingDrug-target-indication relationshipDrug-target interaction predictionStructure-based drug repositioning

Identifiers

PMID32419905
PMCPMC7215100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.