Species | Target name | Source | Bibliographic reference |
---|---|---|---|
Homo sapiens | TAR DNA binding protein | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Homo sapiens | lamin A/C | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Species | Potential target | Raw | Global | Species |
---|---|---|---|---|
Brugia malayi | intermediate filament protein | 0.0033 | 0.0059 | 0.0081 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Brugia malayi | Telomerase reverse transcriptase | 0.1873 | 0.725 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | TAR-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Leishmania major | telomerase reverse transcriptase, putative | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Brugia malayi | Intermediate filament tail domain containing protein | 0.0033 | 0.0059 | 0.0081 |
Brugia malayi | TAR-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 0.0318 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | tar DNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Toxoplasma gondii | RNA-directed DNA polymerase | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Echinococcus granulosus | tar DNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | intermediate filament tail domain-containing protein | 0.0033 | 0.0059 | 0.2561 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | hypothetical protein | 0.0033 | 0.0059 | 0.2561 |
Brugia malayi | RNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 0.0318 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | intermediate filament protein | 0.0033 | 0.0059 | 0.2561 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | hypothetical protein | 0.0032 | 0.0057 | 0.246 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | RNA recognition domain-containing protein domain-containing protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Brugia malayi | RNA recognition motif domain containing protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 0.0318 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Trypanosoma cruzi | telomerase reverse transcriptase, putative | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Plasmodium falciparum | telomerase reverse transcriptase | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Plasmodium vivax | telomerase reverse transcriptase, putative | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Trypanosoma brucei | telomerase reverse transcriptase | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | RNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.0231 | 1 |
Giardia lamblia | Telomerase catalytic subunit | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Trypanosoma cruzi | telomerase reverse transcriptase, putative | 0.0704 | 0.2682 | 0.5 |
Activity type | Activity value | Assay description | Source | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
Potency (functional) | 6.3096 uM | PubChem BioAssay. qHTS of TDP-43 Inhibitors. (Class of assay: confirmatory) | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | = 15.8489 um | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: qHTS Assay for Modulators of Lamin A Splicing. (Class of assay: confirmatory) | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (binding) | = 25.1189 um | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: qHTS Assay for Identification of Novel General Anesthetics. In this assay, a GABAergic mimetic model system, apoferritin and a profluorescent 1-aminoanthracene ligand (1-AMA), was used to construct a competitive binding assay for identification of novel general anesthetics (Class of assay: confirmatory) [Related pubchem assays: 2385 (Probe Development Summary for Identification of Novel General Anesthetics), 2323 (Validation apoferritin assay run on SigmaAldrich LOPAC1280 collection)] | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | 31.6228 uM | PubChem BioAssay. qHTS for Inhibitors of Glutaminase (GLS). (Class of assay: confirmatory) | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | 100 uM | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: HTS for Inhibitors of HP1-beta Chromodomain Interactions with Methylated Histone Tails. (Class of assay: confirmatory) [Related pubchem assays (depositor defined):AID488962] | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Many chemical entities in TDR Targets come from high-throughput screenings with whole cells or tissue samples, and not all assayed compounds have been tested against a single a single target protein, probably because they get ruled out during screening process. Even if these compounds may have not been of interest in the original screening, they may come as interesting leads for other screening assays. Furthermore, we may be able to propose drug-target associations using chemical similarities and network patterns.