Species | Target name | Source | Bibliographic reference |
---|---|---|---|
Homo sapiens | GNAS complex locus | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Escherichia coli | penicillin-binding protein | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Influenza A virus | Nonstructural protein 1 | Starlite/ChEMBL | No references |
Species | Potential target | Known druggable target | Length | Alignment span | Identity |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Hypothetical protein | Nonstructural protein 1 | 230 aa | 202 aa | 23.8 % |
Schistosoma mansoni | GTP-binding protein alpha subunit gna | GNAS complex locus | 394 aa | 450 aa | 28.7 % |
Species | Potential target | Raw | Global | Species |
---|---|---|---|---|
Loa Loa (eye worm) | helix-loop-helix DNA-binding domain-containing protein | 0.0329 | 1 | 1 |
Onchocerca volvulus | Deterin homolog | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 1 |
Brugia malayi | Inhibitor of Apoptosis domain containing protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | hypothetical protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Schistosoma mansoni | inhibitor of apoptosis (iap) domain family member | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Onchocerca volvulus | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 1 | |
Echinococcus multilocularis | inhibitor of apoptosis protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Brugia malayi | Inhibitor of Apoptosis domain containing protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Schistosoma mansoni | bhlhzip transcription factor bigmax | 0.0329 | 1 | 1 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Possible penicillin-binding protein | 0.0278 | 0.8011 | 0.5 |
Schistosoma mansoni | hypothetical protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Schistosoma mansoni | bhlhzip transcription factor bigmax | 0.0329 | 1 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | inhibitor of apoptosis protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | max protein X | 0.0329 | 1 | 1 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | baculoviral IAP repeat containing protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | hypothetical protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Echinococcus granulosus | inhibitor of apoptosis protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Echinococcus granulosus | baculoviral IAP repeat containing protein | 0.0277 | 0.7998 | 0.7998 |
Echinococcus granulosus | max protein X | 0.0329 | 1 | 1 |
Activity type | Activity value | Assay description | Source | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
Potency (functional) | = 0.7079 um | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: qHTS Inhibitors of AmpC Beta-Lactamase (assay with detergent). (Class of assay: confirmatory) [Related pubchem assays: 1002 (Confirmation Concentration-Response Assay for Inhibitors of AmpC Beta-Lactamase (assay with detergent)), 585 (Promiscuous and Specific Inhibitors of AmpC Beta-Lactamase (assay without detergent) - a screen old NIH MLSMR collection), 584 (Promiscuous and Specific Inhibitors of AmpC Beta-Lactamase (assay with detergent) - a screen of the old NIH MLSMR collection), 1003 (Confirmation Cuvette-Based Assay for Inhibitors of AmpC Beta-Lactamase (assay with detergent))] | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | 14.1254 uM | PubChem BioAssay. qHTS for Antagonists of gsp, the Etiologic Mutation Responsible for Fibrous Dysplasia/McCune-Albright Syndrome: qHTS. (Class of assay: confirmatory) | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | = 19.9526 um | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: qHTS Assay for Inhibitors of Influenza NS1 Protein Function. (Class of assay: confirmatory) | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | 50.1187 uM | PubChem BioAssay. qHTS for Agonist of gsp, the Etiologic Mutation Responsible for Fibrous Dysplasia/McCune-Albright Syndrome: qHTS. (Class of assay: confirmatory) | ChEMBL. | No reference |
Potency (functional) | 89.1251 uM | PUBCHEM_BIOASSAY: qHTS for Inhibitors of Polymerase Iota. (Class of assay: confirmatory) [Related pubchem assays (depositor defined):AID588623] | 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.