Overview
Degrader assessment asks a different question from inhibitor assessment. Occupancy is not the endpoint, catalytic behaviour matters, and selectivity has to be judged at the level of the degraded proteome rather than the bound target. We support that assessment computationally: analysing ternary complexes, predicting ADMET and DMPK properties for molecules well outside conventional property space, and interpreting the degradation and proteomics data that establish whether a compound does what it is supposed to.
Key Advantages
Selectivity Judged Proteome-Wide
Neo-substrate and off-target degradation risk is assessed against the surface and sequence features that drive it, and global proteomics data is analysed where it exists.
DMPK Prediction Fit For Purpose
Property prediction uses models appropriate to beyond-rule-of-five chemistry, and states where a compound sits outside the applicability domain rather than returning a confident-looking number.
Degradation Data Interpreted Properly
DC50, Dmax, hook behaviour and kinetics are analysed together, since a compound with excellent DC50 and poor Dmax is a different problem from the reverse.
Structure Linked To Behaviour
Observed degradation differences across a series are related back to the ternary models, which is what turns an assay result into a design instruction.
Where This Service Is Used
How the Work Is Performed
What We Need From You
What You Receive
Questions We Are Asked Before Scoping
Can you predict DC50 or Dmax?
- No. Both depend on cellular ubiquitination and proteasome processing that computation does not resolve. We explain observed differences structurally and predict properties, which is a narrower but genuinely useful contribution.
How do we assess selectivity properly?
- Global proteomics after treatment is the standard approach. We help design the experiment and analyse the data, including the statistics that separate genuine off-target degradation from variability.
Is computational DMPK reliable for degraders?
- Less so than for conventional small molecules, because most models were trained on rule-of-five chemistry. We say where a compound falls outside the applicability domain instead of quoting a number regardless.
Interpretation and Limitations
This is a computational (in silico) service. Designs and predictions prioritise hypotheses and direct experimental effort; they do not by themselves establish that an edit, construct, molecule or assay will perform as intended. Laboratory execution — editing, cloning, expression, synthesis and testing — is planned with you and carried out by your own team or a qualified partner. Deliverables are for research use only and are not intended for diagnostic or therapeutic use.
Specifications
| Item | Specification | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Compounds per study | 1–50 | Series analysis is the usual scope |
| Typical turnaround | 3–6 weeks | Proteomics analysis adds time |
| Proteomics | TMT, LFQ, DIA | Analysed where supplied |
| Output | Report, models, analysis code | Publication-quality figures included |
Service Workflow
Scientific Consultation
We discuss the objective, the decision it supports and the material and data you already hold.
Feasibility Review
We check that the target, system and available information can support the approach, and say plainly where they cannot.
Technical Proposal
Scope, methods, deliverables, timeline and price are confirmed in writing, together with the limitations we expect to report.
Design and Analysis
The design work runs on documented tools and parameters, with quality checks and alternatives compared where that is informative.
Delivery and Follow-Up
You receive the designs, the supporting analysis and a validation plan, plus support interpreting the results once the experiments run.
Is This the Right Service for You?
Choose this service when
Consider another service when
What Goes Wrong, and How We Handle It
The failure modes that produce confident-looking results which do not survive the next experiment. Each one is designed against rather than discovered afterwards.
Case Studies
Illustrative of the shape this work takes. Details are generalised, no client or target is identified, and scope and outcome vary with the system in question.
Note: ICDMO delivers computational (in silico) services. Results prioritise hypotheses for testing; they do not by themselves establish binding, biological activity, efficacy or safety. All deliverables are for research use only and are not intended for diagnostic or therapeutic use. Downstream experimental work is scoped separately and executed through qualified partners.
Get in Touch
about Degrader Assessment & Validation Support
Tell us about the target, the data you hold and the decision the result needs to support. A scientist reviews every enquiry and replies within one business day.