Species | Target name | Source | Bibliographic reference |
---|---|---|---|
Homo sapiens | TAR DNA binding protein | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Homo sapiens | nuclear factor, erythroid 2-like 2 | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Homo sapiens | SMAD family member 2 | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Species | Potential target | Known druggable target | Length | Alignment span | Identity |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Brugia malayi | MH2 domain containing protein | SMAD family member 2 | 467 aa | 405 aa | 31.6 % |
Species | Potential target | Raw | Global | Species |
---|---|---|---|---|
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | transcription factor LCR-F1 | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5043 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 1 |
Echinococcus granulosus | tar DNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 1 |
Brugia malayi | RNA recognition motif domain containing protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 0.4963 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | Basic leucine zipper (bZIP) transcription | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5043 |
Brugia malayi | TAR-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 0.4963 |
Entamoeba histolytica | hypothetical protein | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | transcription factor SMAD2 | 0.0144 | 1 | 1 |
Echinococcus granulosus | Basic leucine zipper bZIP transcription | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5043 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | TAR-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 0.4963 |
Brugia malayi | RNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 0.4963 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | tar DNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | RNA binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 0.4963 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | MH2 domain-containing protein | 0.0144 | 1 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | tar DNA-binding protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 1 |
Brugia malayi | hypothetical protein | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.2503 |
Entamoeba histolytica | hypothetical protein | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | RNA recognition domain-containing protein domain-containing protein | 0.0076 | 0.4963 | 0.4963 |
Entamoeba histolytica | hypothetical protein | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5 |
Schistosoma mansoni | hypothetical protein | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5043 |
Entamoeba histolytica | hypothetical protein | 0.0043 | 0.2503 | 0.5 |
Activity type | Activity value | Assay description | Source | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
Potency (functional) | 7.3078 uM | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: Nrf2 qHTS screen for inhibitors. (Class of assay: confirmatory) [Related pubchem assays (depositor defined):AID493153, AID493163, AID504648] | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | 10 uM | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: qHTS for Inhibitors of TGF-b. (Class of assay: confirmatory) [Related pubchem assays (depositor defined):AID588856, AID588860] | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | 12.5893 uM | PubChem BioAssay. qHTS of TDP-43 Inhibitors. (Class of assay: confirmatory) | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (binding) | = 39.8107 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) | 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.