Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32627025›Full record

ArticleOncology reports2020

Improving the odds of success in antitumoral drug development using scoring approaches towards heterocyclic scaffolds.

George Nicolae Daniel Ion, Octavian Tudorel Olaru, Georgiana Nitulescu, Iulia Ioana Olaru, Aristidis Tsatsakis, Tatiana I Burykina, Demetrios A Spandidos, George Mihai Nitulescu

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

George Nicolae Daniel IonFaculty of Pharmacy, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020956 Bucharest, Romania.
Octavian Tudorel OlaruFaculty of Pharmacy, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020956 Bucharest, Romania.
Georgiana NitulescuFaculty of Pharmacy, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020956 Bucharest, Romania.
Iulia Ioana OlaruFaculty of Pharmacy, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020956 Bucharest, Romania.
Aristidis TsatsakisDepartment of Forensic Sciences and Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, 71003 Heraklion, Greece.
Tatiana I BurykinaDepartment of Analytical and Forensic Medical Toxicology, Sechenov Medical University, 119991 Moscow, Russia.
Demetrios A SpandidosLaboratory of Clinical Virology, School of Medicine, University of Crete, 71003 Heraklion, Greece.
George Mihai NitulescuFaculty of Pharmacy, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020956 Bucharest, Romania.
Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy · ROUniversity of Crete · GRSechenov University · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the most commonly discussed topics in the field of drug discovery is the continuous search for anticancer therapies, in which small‑molecule development plays an important role. Although a number of techniques have been established over the past decades, one of the main methods for drug discovery and development is still represented by rational, ligand‑based drug design. However, the success rate of this method could be higher if not affected by cognitive bias, which renders many potential druggable scaffolds and structures overlooked. The present study aimed to counter this bias by presenting an objective overview of the most important heterocyclic structures in the development of anti‑proliferative drugs. As such, the present study analyzed data for 91,438 compounds extracted from the Developmental Therapeutics Program (DTP) database provided by the National Cancer Institute. Growth inhibition data from these compounds tested on a panel of 60 cancer cell lines representing various tissue types (NCI‑60 panel) was statistically interpreted using 6 generated scores assessing activity, selectivity, growth inhibition efficacy and potency of different structural scaffolds, Bemis‑Murcko skeletons, chemical features and structures common among the analyzed compounds. Of the most commonly used rings, the most prominent anti‑proliferative effects were produced by quinoline, tetrahydropyran, benzimidazole and pyrazole, while overall, the optimal results were produced by complex ring structures that originate from natural compounds. These results highlight the impact of certain ring structures on the anti‑proliferative effects in drug design. In addition, considering that medicinal chemists usually focus their research on simpler scaffolds the majority of the time with no significant pay‑off, the present study indicates several unused complex scaffolds that could be exploited when designing anticancer therapies for optimal results in the fight against cancer.

Indexed as

Drug DesignAntineoplastic AgentsCell Line, TumorCell ProliferationChemistry, PharmaceuticalDatasets as TopicDrug DiscoveryDrug Screening Assays, AntitumorHeterocyclic CompoundsHumansNeoplasmsStructure-Activity RelationshipAntineoplastic AgentsHeterocyclic Compoundsanti‑proliferative activityBemis‑Murcko scaffoldscancer cell linedrug designgrowth inhibitionNCI‑60 cell line panelprivileged structuresscreening oncology compounds

Identifiers

PMID32627025
PMCPMC7336486
OpenAlexW3033669984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.