Overview

Target identification and validation are foundational stages in early drug discovery that guide the shift from biological hypotheses to therapeutic development. These steps determine which molecular mechanisms are worth pursuing before significant investment, reducing development risk, increasing translational success, and ensuring drug discovery efforts are grounded in a strong biological rationale.

What is target identification in drug discovery?

Target identification entails pinpointing the specific molecular target, such as a protein or nucleic acid, with which a small molecule interacts. In clinical pharmacology, this process focuses on identifying the primary target responsible for the effectiveness of a drug, pharmaceutical compound, or other foreign substance⁴.

Common approaches include:

• Genetic or genomic approaches leverage DNA and RNA manipulation to generate hypotheses about potential targets⁵
• Proteomic analysis to compare variations in cellular proteins before and after drug intervention, thereby identifying elements that specifically affect protein expression⁶
• High-throughput screening (HTS) to rapidly test a large number of samples to understand interactions between molecules of interest and biological systems⁷

Challenges lie in the time- and resource-intensive nature of specific target assessments and the limited interpretability and replicability of outcomes generated by machine learning methods, which constrain their utility in target identification⁸.

Moreover, the detection of targets with low abundance, weak binding, or membrane proteins presents difficulties in the target identification process⁹. Validation of hits and the deconvolution of targets are also substantial challenges in the realm of phenotypic drug discovery¹⁰.

How is a target biologically validated before drug development?

Target validation is the process of subjecting a potential drug target to a series of rigorous experiments and investigations, confirming its direct involvement in a specific biological pathway, and demonstrating its capacity to produce a therapeutic effect, thus establishing its suitability for further drug development¹¹.

Typical validation workflow¹²:

• Computational modeling to screen targets for potential drug interactions
• In vitro validation using cell-based assays
• Genetic perturbation (gene knockouts, RNA interference, antisense technology)
• Phenotypic analysis, including cellular fitness and proliferation outcomes

Target Identification vs. Target Validation

What Are the Most Common Challenges in Target Discovery?

A widely used method is the cell-based assay, which involves culturing cells in a controlled environment and assessing their response to specific drugs. This approach enables scientists to gauge the drug's effects on cellular functions and assess its suitability as a potential therapeutic candidate.

For example, the Cellular Thermal Shift Assay (CETSA) is a cell-based assay that quantifies the interaction of drugs with specific proteins within cells¹³. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is a widely used technique for examining gene expression profiles and can provide crucial insights into how drug treatments affect gene expression levels¹⁴.

Mouse models are considered a highly reliable system for confirming potential targets. Tumor cell line xenograft models are commonly utilized for in vivo validation of these targets due to their manageability, adaptability, and ability to mimic the genetic variations found in human tumors¹⁵.

In vivo methods offer the advantage of confirming that a compound can interact with and impact the cellular target within a living organism¹⁶. Nonetheless, validating drug targets in living organisms can be difficult and time-consuming. This process requires the use of animal models, which may not consistently reflect human physiology and disease states¹⁷.

In vitro techniques offer cost-effective, quicker, ethically sound, and less labor-intensive alternatives for assessing drug absorption. A significant drawback of in vitro drug validation is the challenge of applying the findings to real clinical scenarios¹⁸. An illustration of this is the lymphocyte transformation test, frequently employed in diagnosing drug hypersensitivity, which faces limitations in effectively translating T cell proliferation observed in vitro to the clinical context¹⁹.

What technologies are reshaping target identification and validation?

• Application of chemical proteomics enables the identification of protein targets at the proteomic level²⁰. This method entails creating chemical probes that specifically bind to the desired proteins, followed by their retrieval and identification. Progress in mass spectrometry techniques has played a crucial role in biological target identification and validation²¹.
• Artificial intelligence (AI) represents a sophisticated approach for identifying new targets and uncovering innovative drugs within biological networks. This is possible because these networks can robustly maintain and quantitatively assess the interactions among various components of cellular systems associated with human diseases such as cancer²².
• Machine learning methods enhance decision-making in the pharmaceutical field, improving data analysis across applications such as QSAR analysis, compound identification, and drug design, thereby enabling precise and reliable results²³.
• Pharmacophore models enable target identification for active drug molecules, aiding in understanding drug mechanisms and exploring drug repositioning and polypharmacology. Activity-based protein profiling (ABPP) with mass spectrometry is effective for proteome-wide target identification, particularly for ATP-binding proteins, revealing a wide array of potential drug targets²⁴.

References

1. Wang S, Sim TB, Kim YS, Chang YT. Tools for target identification and validation. Current Opinion in Chemical Biology. 2004 ;8(4):371–7.
2. Pankevich DE, Altevogt BM, Dunlop J, Gage FH, Hyman SE. Improving and Accelerating Drug Development for Nervous System Disorders. Neuron. 2014;84(3):546–53.
3. Emmerich CH, Gamboa LM, Hofmann MCJ, Bonin-Andresen M, Arbach O, Schendel P, et al. Improving target assessment in biomedical research: the GOT-IT recommendations. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2021;20(1):64–81.
4. Tabana Y, Babu D, Fahlman RP, Siraki AG, Barakat K. Target identification of small molecules: an overview of the current applications in drug discovery. BMC Biotechnol. 2023;23(1).
5. Schenone M, Dančík V, Wagner BK, Clemons PA. Target identification and mechanism of action in chemical biology and drug discovery. Nat Chem Biol. 2013;9(4):232–40.
6. Li G, Peng X, Guo Y, Gong S, Cao S, Qiu F. Currently Available Strategies for Target Identification of Bioactive Natural Products. Front Chem. 2021;9:761609.
7. Mayr LM, Bojanic D. Novel trends in high-throughput screening. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2009;9(5):580–8.
8. Emmerich CH, Gamboa LM, Hofmann MCJ, Bonin-Andresen M, Arbach O, Schendel P, et al. Improving target assessment in biomedical research: the GOT-IT recommendations. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2021;20(1):64–81.
9. Vamathevan J, Clark D, Czodrowski P, Dunham I, Ferran E, Lee G, et al. Applications of machine learning in drug discovery and development. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2019;18(6):463–77.
10. Moffat JG, Vincent F, Lee JA, Eder J, Prunotto M. Opportunities and challenges in phenotypic drug discovery: an industry perspective. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16(8):531–43.
11. Pankevich DE, Altevogt BM, Dunlop J, Gage FH, Hyman SE. Improving and accelerating drug development for nervous system disorders. Neuron. 2014;84(3):546–53.
12. Emmerich CH, Gamboa LM, Hofmann MCJ, Bonin-Andresen M, Arbach O, Schendel P, et al. Improving target assessment in biomedical research: the GOT-IT recommendations. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2021;20(1):64–81.
13. Molina DM, Jafari R, Ignatushchenko M, Seki T, Larsson EA, Dan C, et al. Monitoring Drug Target Engagement in Cells and Tissues Using the Cellular Thermal Shift Assay. Science. 2013;341(6141):84–7.
14. Lu K, Li T, He J, Chang W, Zhang R, Liu M, et al. qPrimerDB: a thermodynamics-based gene-specific qPCR primer database for 147 organisms. Nucleic Acids Research. 2017;46(D1):D1229–36.
15. Wang S, Sim TB, Kim YS, Chang YT. Tools for target identification and validation. Current Opinion in Chemical Biology. 2004;8(4):371–7.
16. La Rosa V, Poce G, Canseco JO, Buroni S, Pasca MR, Biava M, et al. MmpL3 Is the Cellular Target of the Antitubercular Pyrrole Derivative BM212. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. 2012;56(1):324–31.
17. Thakker DR, Natt F, Dieter Hüsken, Maier RM, Müller MM, Herman, et al. Neurochemical and behavioral consequences of widespread gene knockdown in the adult mouse brain by using nonviral RNA interference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2004;101(49):17270–5.
18. Xu Y, Shrestha N, Préat V, Beloqui A. An overview of in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo models for studying the transport of drugs across intestinal barriers. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2021;175:113795.
19. Pichler WJ, Tilch J. The lymphocyte transformation test in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity. Allergy. 2004 [cited 2022];59(8):809–20.
20. Ha J, Park H, Park J, Park SB. Recent advances in identifying protein targets in drug discovery. Cell Chemical Biology. 2021;28(3):394–423.
21. Chen X, Wang Y, Ma N, Tian J, Shao Y, Zhu B, et al. Target identification of natural medicine with chemical proteomics approach: probe synthesis, target fishing and protein identification. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. 2020;5(1).
22. You Y, Lai X, Pan Y, Zheng H, Vera J, Liu S, et al. Artificial intelligence in cancer target identification and drug discovery. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. 2022;7(1).
23. Dara S, Dhamercherla S, Jadav SS, Babu CM, Ahsan MJ. Machine Learning in Drug Discovery: A Review. Artificial Intelligence Review. 2021;55(3).
24. Chen X, Wong YK, Wang J, Zhang J, Lee YM, Shen HM, et al. Target identification with quantitative activity based protein profiling (ABPP). PROTEOMICS. 2016;17(3-4):1600212.