Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bo_rrito t1_j7moagt wrote

Why the decision to ignore structure based drug design?

1

IHaque_Recursion t1_j7mws6x wrote

The majority of drugs don’t fail because we can’t engage the target with a small or large molecule - they fail because we pick the wrong target. Hence our focus on mapping and navigating causal biology. Our platform is exceptionally well-suited to target-agnostic identification of compounds that impact biology, which absolutely means we don’t always know the target of our compounds. However, one of the major advantages of our map is that it can often uncover the real targets of our active compounds, enabling us to use advancements in structure-based. Additionally, the underlying learnings in this field are even useful in the target-agnostic space, as we try to featurize compounds and learn how to make molecules not only more potent against their primary target, but also in enhancing their overall efficacy, safety and metabolic profile.
That said, we actually do make use of structure-based methods where appropriate. What we don’t do is limit ourselves to solely identifying particular targets (and their structures) ahead of time when initiating discovery programs.

1

bo_rrito t1_j7n15as wrote

Thank you-- this is an interesting perspective! I spend large amounts of time convincing structure-based scientists that dynamics, thermodynamics, and kinetics are important to understand drug binding and biological function (and especially allostery), so circumventing structure seems like a whole other paradigm.

If you can point me to any comprehensive papers describing your approach, I'd be really grateful!

2