Predicting the protein targets for athletic performance-enhancing substances
Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2026

Protein Target Prediction and Validation of Small Molecule Compound
Published on: February 23, 2024
Lazaros Mavridis1, John Bo Mitchell
1Biomedical Sciences Research Complex and EaStCHEM School of Chemistry, Purdie Building, University of St Andrews, North Haugh, St Andrews, Scotland KY16 9ST, UK. lm213@st-andrews.ac.uk.
Background:
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) publishes the Prohibited List, a manually compiled international standard of substances and methods prohibited in-competition, out-of-competition and in particular sports. It would be ideal to be able to identify all substances that have one or more performance-enhancing pharmacological actions in an automated, fast and cost effective way. Here, we use experimental data derived from the ChEMBL database (~7,000,000 activity records for 1,300,000 compounds) to build a database model that takes into account both structure and experimental information, and use this database to predict both on-target and off-target interactions between these molecules and targets relevant to doping in sport.
Results:
The ChEMBL database was screened and eight well populated categories of activities (Ki, Kd, EC50, ED50, activity, potency, inhibition and IC50) were used for a rule-based filtering process to define the labels "active" or "inactive". The "active" compounds for each of the ChEMBL families were thereby defined and these populated our bioactivity-based filtered families. A structure-based clustering step was subsequently performed in order to split families with more than one distinct chemical scaffold. This produced refined families, whose members share both a common chemical scaffold and bioactivity against a common target in ChEMBL.
Conclusions:
We have used the Parzen-Rosenblatt machine learning approach to test whether compounds in ChEMBL can be correctly predicted to belong to their appropriate refined families. Validation tests using the refined families gave a significant increase in predictivity compared with the filtered or with the original families. Out of 61,660 queries in our Monte Carlo cross-validation, belonging to 19,639 refined families, 41,300 (66.98%) had the parent family as the top prediction and 53,797 (87.25%) had the parent family in the top four hits. Having thus validated our approach, we used it to identify the protein targets associated with the WADA prohibited classes. For compounds where we do not have experimental data, we use their computed patterns of interaction with protein targets to make predictions of bioactivity. We hope that other groups will test these predictions experimentally in the future.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Protein-protein Interfaces
Protein Networks
These interactions can be represented through maps depicting protein-protein interaction networks, represented as nodes and edges. Nodes are circles that are representative of a protein,...
Targets for Drug Action: Overview
Receptors are either membrane-spanning or intracellular proteins, which upon binding a ligand, get activated and transmit the signal downstream to elicit a response. Drugs bind receptors, either mimicking the action of endogenous ligands or blocking the receptor activity to bring about a modified response. Nearly 35% of approved drugs target the G...
Ligand Binding Sites
Protein-ligand interactions are quite specific; even though numerous potential ligands surround a cellular protein at any given time, only a particular ligand can bind to that protein. Moreover, a ligand binds only to a dedicated area on the surface of the protein, known as the...
Pharmacogenomics: Identification of New Drug Targets
Pharmacogenetics of Drug Targets: β₂-Adrenergic Receptors, Apo E, Thymidylate Synthase

