Species | Potential target | Raw | Global | Species |
---|---|---|---|---|
Mycobacterium leprae | CARBONIC ANHYDRASE (CARBONATE DEHYDRATASE) (CARBONIC DEHYDRATASE) | 0.0267 | 0.3487 | 0.5 |
Schistosoma mansoni | carbonic anhydrase II (carbonate dehydratase II) | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Echinococcus granulosus | carbonic anhydrase II | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Trypanosoma cruzi | carbonic anhydrase-like protein, putative | 0.055 | 1 | 0.5 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | carbonic anhydrase II | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Toxoplasma gondii | hypothetical protein | 0.0242 | 0.2914 | 0.5 |
Trichomonas vaginalis | conserved hypothetical protein | 0.0116 | 0 | 0.5 |
Mycobacterium ulcerans | carbonic anhydrase | 0.0267 | 0.3487 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | carbonic anhydrase 3 | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Leishmania major | carbonic anhydrase-like protein | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Entamoeba histolytica | carbonic anhydrase, putative | 0.0267 | 0.3487 | 0.5 |
Trypanosoma brucei | carbonic anhydrase-like protein | 0.055 | 1 | 0.5 |
Schistosoma mansoni | carbonic anhydrase | 0.0267 | 0.3487 | 0.0808 |
Plasmodium falciparum | carbonic anhydrase | 0.0242 | 0.2914 | 0.5 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Beta-carbonic anhydrase CanB | 0.0152 | 0.083 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | carbonic anhydrase II (carbonate dehydratase II) | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Brugia malayi | Putative carbonic anhydrase 5 precursor | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | eukaryotic-type carbonic anhydrase | 0.055 | 1 | 1 |
Trichomonas vaginalis | conserved hypothetical protein | 0.0116 | 0 | 0.5 |
Trypanosoma cruzi | carbonic anhydrase-like protein, putative | 0.055 | 1 | 0.5 |
Activity type | Activity value | Assay description | Source | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
IC50 (binding) | = 24 uM | Inhibitory activity against dog gastric proton-pump enzyme H+/K+ ATPase | ChEMBL. | 2153817 |
Inhibition (binding) | = 74 % | Percent inhibition of gastric proton-pump enzyme H+/K+ ATPase was determined at 50 uM | ChEMBL. | 2153817 |
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.
1 literature reference was collected for this gene.