Yang, H. et al. admetSAR 2.0: web-service for prediction and optimization of chemical ADMET properties. Bioinformatics 35, 1067–1069 (2019).
Google Scholar
Huang, T. et al. MOST: most-similar ligand based approach to target prediction. BMC Bioinform. 18, 165 (2017).
Jumper, J. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596, 583–589 (2021).
Google Scholar
Corso G., Stärk H., Jing B., Barzilay R. & Jaakkola T. DiffDock: diffusion steps, twists, and turns for molecular docking. [Preprint] Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.01776 [accessed 30 April 2024] (2023).
Singh, R., Sledzieski, S., Bryson, B., Cowen, L. & Berger, B. Contrastive learning in protein language space predicts interactions between drugs and protein targets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2220778120 (2023).
Google Scholar
Priya, S., Tripathi, G., Singh, D. B., Jain, P. & Kumar, A. Machine learning approaches and their applications in drug discovery and design. Chem. Biol. Drug Des. 100, 136–153 (2022).
Google Scholar
Dara, S., Dhamercherla, S., Jadav, S. S., Babu, C. M. & Ahsan, M. J. Machine learning in drug discovery: a review. Artif. Intell. Rev. 55, 1947–1999 (2022).
Google Scholar
Bilodeau, C., Jin, W., Jaakkola, T., Barzilay, R. & Jensen, K. F. Generative models for molecular discovery: recent advances and challenges. WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 12, e1608 (2022).
Tong, X. et al. Generative models for de novo drug design. J. Med. Chem. 64, 14011–14027 (2021).
Google Scholar
Zeng, X. et al. Deep generative molecular design reshapes drug discovery. Cell Rep. Med. 3, 100794 (2022).
Google Scholar
Bian, Y. & Xie, X.-Q. Generative chemistry: drug discovery with deep learning generative models. J. Mol. Model. 27, 71 (2021).
Google Scholar
Gm, H., Gourisaria, M. K., Pandey, M. & Rautaray, S. S. A comprehensive survey and analysis of generative models in machine learning. Comput. Sci. Rev. 38, 100285 (2020).
Olivecrona, M., Blaschke, T., Engkvist, O. & Chen, H. Molecular de-novo design through deep reinforcement learning. J. Cheminform. 9, 48 (2017).
Google Scholar
Polykovskiy, D. et al. Entangled conditional adversarial autoencoder for de novo drug discovery. Mol. Pharm. 15, 4398–4405 (2018).
Google Scholar
Popova, M., Isayev, O. & Tropsha, A. Deep reinforcement learning for de-novo drug design. Sci. Adv. 4, eaap7885 (2018).
Google Scholar
Li, Y., Zhang, L. & Liu, Z. Multi-objective de novo drug design with conditional graph generative model. J. Cheminform. 10, 33 (2018).
Google Scholar
Jin W., Barzilay R. & Jaakkola T. Multi-objective molecule generation using interpretable substructures. [Preprint] Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/2002.03244 [accessed 7 May 2024](2020).
Maziarka, Ł. et al. Mol-CycleGAN: a generative model for molecular optimization. J. Cheminform. 12, 2 (2020).
Google Scholar
Grisoni, F. et al. Combining generative artificial intelligence and on-chip synthesis for de novo drug design. Sci. Adv. 7, eabg3338 (2021).
Google Scholar
Gómez-Bombarelli, R. et al. Automatic chemical design using a data-driven continuous representation of molecules. ACS Cent. Sci. 4, 268–276 (2018).
Google Scholar
You J., Liu B., Ying R., Pande V. & Leskovec J. Graph convolutional policy network for goal-directed molecular graph generation. [Preprint] Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1806.02473 [accessed 9 May 2023] (2019).
Born, J. et al. Data-driven molecular design for discovery and synthesis of novel ligands: a case study on SARS-CoV-2. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 2, 025024 (2021).
Flam-Shepherd, D., Zhu, K. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. Language models can learn complex molecular distributions. Nat. Commun. 13, 3293 (2022).
Google Scholar
Segler, M. H. S., Kogej, T., Tyrchan, C. & Waller, M. P. Generating focused molecule libraries for drug discovery with recurrent neural networks. ACS Cent. Sci. 4, 120–131 (2018).
Google Scholar
Kadurin, A. et al. The cornucopia of meaningful leads: applying deep adversarial autoencoders for new molecule development in oncology. Oncotarget 8, 10883–10890 (2016).
Google Scholar
Merk, D., Friedrich, L., Grisoni, F. & Schneider, G. De novo design of bioactive small molecules by artificial intelligence. Mol. Inform. 37, 1700153 (2018).
Google Scholar
Zhavoronkov, A. et al. Deep learning enables rapid identification of potent DDR1 kinase inhibitors. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1038–1040 (2019).
Google Scholar
Moret, M., Helmstädter, M., Grisoni, F., Schneider, G. & Merk, D. Beam search for automated design and scoring of novel ROR ligands with machine intelligence. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 60, 19477–19482 (2021).
Google Scholar
Krishnan, S. R., Bung, N., Bulusu, G. & Roy, A. Accelerating de novo drug design against novel proteins using deep learning. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 61, 621–630 (2021).
Google Scholar
Korshunova, M. et al. Generative and reinforcement learning approaches for the automated de novo design of bioactive compounds. Commun. Chem. 5, 1–11 (2022).
Chen, Y. et al. Deep generative model for drug design from protein target sequence. J. Cheminform. 15, 38 (2023).
Google Scholar
Kyro, G. W., Morgunov, A., Brent, R. I. & Batista, V. S. ChemSpaceAL: an efficient active learning methodology applied to protein-specific molecular generation. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 64, 653–665 (2024).
Google Scholar
Loeffler, H., Wan, S., Klähn, M., Bhati, A. & Coveney, P. Optimal molecular design: generative active learning combining REINVENT with absolute binding free energy simulations. https://chemrxiv.org/engage/chemrxiv/article-details/662a030e418a5379b0aa3994. [Preprint] accessed 7 May 2024 (2024).
Atz, K. et al. Prospective de novo drug design with deep interactome learning. Nat. Commun. 15, 3408 (2024).
Google Scholar
Gupta, A. et al. Generative recurrent networks for de novo drug design. Mol. Inform. 37, 1700111 (2018).
Google Scholar
Moret, M., Friedrich, L., Grisoni, F., Merk, D. & Schneider, G. Generative molecular design in low data regimes. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2, 171–180 (2020).
Ertl, P. & Schuffenhauer, A. Estimation of synthetic accessibility score of drug-like molecules based on molecular complexity and fragment contributions. J. Cheminform. 1, 8 (2009).
Google Scholar
Swanson, K. et al. Generative AI for designing and validating easily synthesizable and structurally novel antibiotics. Nat. Mach. Intell. 6, 338–353 (2024).
Mohammadi S., O’Dowd B., Paulitz-Erdmann C. & Goerlitz L. Penalized variational autoencoder for molecular design. [Preprint] Available at: https://chemrxiv.org/engage/chemrxiv/article-details/60c74169f96a0012ee286438 [accessed 8 May 2024] (2019).
Bagal, V., Aggarwal, R., Vinod, P. K. & Priyakumar, U. D. MolGPT: molecular generation using a transformer-decoder model. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 62, 2064–2076 (2022).
Google Scholar
Ahmad W., Simon E., Chithrananda S., Grand G. & Ramsundar B. ChemBERTa-2: towards chemical foundation models. [Preprint] Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/2209.01712 [accessed 23 March 2025] (2022).
Balaji S., Magar R., Jadhav Y. & Farimani A. B. GPT-MolBERTa: GPT molecular features language model for molecular property prediction. [Preprint] Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.03030 [accessed 27 May 2025] (2023).
Huang, L. et al. A dual diffusion model enables 3D molecule generation and lead optimization based on target pockets. Nat. Commun. 15, 2657 (2024).
Google Scholar
Oestreich, M. et al. DrugDiff: small molecule diffusion model with flexible guidance towards molecular properties. J. Cheminform. 17, 23 (2025).
Google Scholar
Alakhdar, A., Poczos, B. & Washburn, N. Diffusion models in de novo drug design. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 64, 7238–7256 (2024).
Google Scholar
Kingma, D. P. & Welling, M. An introduction to variational autoencoders. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 12, 307–392 (2019).
Ali, S. & van Kaick, O. Evaluation of latent space learning with procedurally-generated datasets of shapes. In Proc. 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW) 2086–2094 (IEEE, 2021).
Ding, X. et al. Active learning for drug design: a case study on the plasma exposure of orally administered drugs. J. Med. Chem. 64, 16838–16853 (2021).
Google Scholar
Vasanthakumari, P. et al. A comprehensive investigation of active learning strategies for conducting anti-cancer drug screening. Cancers 16, 530 (2024).
Google Scholar
Eisenstein, M. Active machine learning helps drug hunters tackle biology. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 512–514 (2020).
Google Scholar
Bertin, P. et al. RECOVER identifies synergistic drug combinations in vitro through sequential model optimization. Cell Rep. Methods 3, 100599 (2023).
Graff, D. E., Shakhnovich, E. I. & Coley, C. W. Accelerating high-throughput virtual screening through molecular pool-based active learning. Chem. Sci. 12, 7866–7881 (2021).
Google Scholar
Nahal, Y. et al. Human-in-the-loop active learning for goal-oriented molecule generation. J. Cheminform. 16, 138 (2024).
Google Scholar
Borrelli, K. W., Cossins, B. & Guallar, V. Exploring hierarchical refinement techniques for induced fit docking with protein and ligand flexibility. J. Comput. Chem. 31, 1224–1235 (2010).
Google Scholar
Puch-Giner, I., Molina, A., Municoy, M., Pérez, C. & Guallar, V. Recent PELE developments and applications in drug discovery campaigns. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 23, 16090 (2022).
Google Scholar
Tadesse, S., Caldon, E. C., Tilley, W. & Wang, S. Cyclin-dependent kinase 2 inhibitors in cancer therapy: an update. J. Med. Chem. 62, 4233–4251 (2019).
Google Scholar
Asghar, U., Witkiewicz, A. K., Turner, N. C. & Knudsen, E. S. The history and future of targeting cyclin-dependent kinases in cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 14, 130–146 (2015).
Google Scholar
Shapiro, G. I. Preclinical and clinical development of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor flavopiridol. Clin. Cancer Res. 10, 4270s–4275s (2004).
Google Scholar
Jackson, R. C., Barnett, A. L., McClue, S. J. & Green, S. R. Seliciclib, a cell-cycle modulator that acts through the inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 3, 131–143 (2008).
Google Scholar
Hunter, J. C. et al. Biochemical and structural analysis of common cancer-associated KRAS mutations. Mol. Cancer Res. 13, 1325–1335 (2015).
Google Scholar
Biankin, A. V. et al. Pancreatic cancer genomes reveal aberrations in axon guidance pathway genes. Nature 491, 399–405 (2012).
Google Scholar
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, Comprehensive molecular profiling of lung adenocarcinoma. Nature 511, 543–550 (2014).
Neumann, J., Zeindl-Eberhart, E., Kirchner, T. & Jung, A. Frequency and type of KRAS mutations in routine diagnostic analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer. Pathol. Res. Pract. 205, 858–862 (2009).
Google Scholar
Ostrem, J. M., Peters, U., Sos, M. L., Wells, J. A. & Shokat, K. M. K-Ras(G12C) inhibitors allosterically control GTP affinity and effector interactions. Nature 503, 548–551 (2013).
Google Scholar
Liu, J., Kang, R. & Tang, D. The KRAS-G12C inhibitor: activity and resistance. Cancer Gene Ther. 29, 875–878 (2022).
Google Scholar
Kwan, A. K., Piazza, G. A., Keeton, A. B. & Leite, C. A. The path to the clinic: a comprehensive review on direct KRASG12C inhibitors. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 41, 27 (2022).
Google Scholar
Shin, Y. et al. Discovery of N-(1-Acryloylazetidin-3-yl)-2-(1H-indol-1-yl)acetamides as covalent inhibitors of KRASG12C. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 10, 1302–1308 (2019).
Google Scholar
Mao, Z. et al. KRAS(G12D) can be targeted by potent inhibitors via formation of salt bridge. Cell Discov. 8, 1–14 (2022).
Wang, X. et al. Identification of MRTX1133, a noncovalent, potent, and selective KRASG12D inhibitor. J. Med. Chem. 65, 3123–3133 (2022).
Google Scholar
McInnes, L., Healy, J. & Melville, J. UMAP: Uniform manifold approximation and projection for dimension reduction. [Preprint] Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03426 [accessed 19 April 2023] (2020).
Friesner, R. A. et al. Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J. Med. Chem. 47, 1739–1749 (2004).
Google Scholar
Boresch, S., Tettinger, F., Leitgeb, M. & Karplus, M. Absolute binding free energies: a quantitative approach for their calculation. J. Phys. Chem. B 107, 9535–9551 (2003).
Google Scholar
Bettayeb, K. et al. Meriolins, a new class of cell death inducing kinase inhibitors with enhanced selectivity for cyclin-dependent kinases. Cancer Res. 67, 8325–8334 (2007).
Google Scholar
REAL Database-Enamine. Available at: https://enamine.net/compound-collections/real-compounds/real-database [accessed 14 April 2023].
infiniSee: the chemical space navigation platform for unlimited accessibles. BioSolveIT. Available at: https://www.biosolveit.de/products/infinisee/ [accessed 10 December 2024].
Kessler, D. et al. Drugging an undruggable pocket on KRAS. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 15823–15829 (2019).
Google Scholar
Gaulton, A. et al. ChEMBL: a large-scale bioactivity database for drug discovery. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, D1100–D1107 (2012).
Google Scholar
Wang, R., Fang, X., Lu, Y. & Wang, S. The PDBbind database: collection of binding affinities for protein−ligand complexes with known three-dimensional structures. J. Med. Chem. 47, 2977–2980 (2004).
Google Scholar
Berman, H. M. et al. The protein data bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 235–242 (2000).
Google Scholar
Kim, S. et al. PubChem 2023 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 51, D1373–D1380 (2023).
Google Scholar
ChemAxon, MedChemExpress: Master of Bioactive Molecules | Inhibitors, Screening Libraries & Proteins. MedchemExpress.com. Available at: https://www.medchemexpress.com/ [accessed 4 April 2023].
Lanman, B. A. et al. Discovery of a covalent inhibitor of KRASG12C (AMG 510) for the treatment of solid tumors. J. Med. Chem. 63, 52–65 (2020).
Google Scholar
Zhang, Y. J. Skolnick, TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score. Nucleic Acids Res. 33, 2302–2309 (2005).
Google Scholar
Sastry, G. M., Adzhigirey, M., Day, T., Annabhimoju, R. & Sherman, W. Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 27, 221–234 (2013).
Google Scholar
Olsson, M. H. M., Søndergaard, C. R., Rostkowski, M. & Jensen, J. H. PROPKA3: consistent treatment of internal and surface residues in empirical pKa predictions. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 7, 525–537 (2011).
Google Scholar
Halgren, T. A. Identifying and characterizing binding sites and assessing druggability. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 49, 377–389 (2009).
Google Scholar
Waskom, M. L. seaborn: statistical data visualization. J. Open Source Softw. 6, 3021 (2021).
Landrum, G. RDKit: Open-source cheminformatics. Available at: https://www.rdkit.org/ [accessed 4 April 2023].(2010).
Bickerton, G. R., Paolini, G. V., Besnard, J., Muresan, S. & Hopkins, A. L. Quantifying the chemical beauty of drugs. Nat. Chem. 4, 90–98 (2012).
Google Scholar
Willett, P., Barnard, J. M. & Downs, G. M. Chemical similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 38, 983–996 (1998).
Google Scholar
Morgan, H. L. The generation of a unique machine description for chemical structures-a technique developed at chemical abstracts service. J. Chem. Doc. 5, 107–113 (1965).
Google Scholar
Borrelli, K. W., Vitalis, A., Alcantara, R. & Guallar, V. PELE: protein energy landscape exploration. a novel Monte Carlo based technique. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 1, 1304–1311 (2005).
Google Scholar
Lecina, D., Gilabert, J. F. & Guallar, V. Adaptive simulations, towards interactive protein-ligand modeling. Sci. Rep. 7, 8466 (2017).
Google Scholar
Mobley, D. L. et al. Predicting absolute ligand binding free energies to a simple model site. J. Mol. Biol. 371, 1118–1134 (2007).
Google Scholar
MarvinSketch. https://chemaxon.com/marvin. Available at: https://chemaxon.com/marvin [accessed 19 April 2023].
Bookstein, A., Kulyukin, V. A. & Raita, T. Generalized hamming distance. Inf. Retr. 5, 353–375 (2002).
Emanuel, S. et al. The in vitro and in vivo effects of JNJ-7706621: a dual inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases and aurora kinases. Cancer Res. 65, 9038–9046 (2005).
Google Scholar
