Back

OmniBind: Proteome-Wide Promiscuity Predictions for Early-Stage Drug Screening

Hanke, J.; Pujalte Ojeda, S.; Cheong, R. W.; Glasstetter, L. M.; Baker, E.; Lam, H. Y. I.; Brezinova, M.; Louet, A. A. B.; Zhang, S.; Vendruscolo, M.

2026-03-18 molecular biology
10.64898/2026.03.17.712433 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Off-target binding remains a leading cause of drug attrition, yet no method exists for rapidly quantifying small-molecule promiscuity across the human proteome. Here, we define promiscuity as the mean predicted binding affinity over 15,405 human proteins and derive a specificity score combining target affinity with this proteome-wide distribution. To make this assessment tractable at scale, we introduce OmniBind, a message-passing neural network that predicts promiscuity directly from a SMILES string at about a thousand compounds per second, several orders of magnitude faster than proteome-wide profiling. OmniBind promiscuity scores correlate with experimental binding data near assay reproducibility limits. Ranking candidates by specificity rather than affinity alone improves enrichment of approved drugs across all thresholds tested, an advantage robust to the choice of affinity predictor. OmniBind fills an unoccupied niche in the early-stage screening landscape as a fast, proteome-scale complement to traditional safety panels, with accuracy that will scale as the underlying affinity predictors continue to improve.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 4%
26.3%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Nature Methods
○ 385 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 7%
6.2%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.0%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Cell Systems
○ 201 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
Similar papers in this journal
6
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 32%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
7
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 11%
3.2%
8
Nature
○ 645 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.2%
9
Cell Genomics
○ 172 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
10
Nature Biotechnology
○ 172 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
11
Nature Machine Intelligence
○ 70 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
12
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.1%
13
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 14%
2.1%
14
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
● 238 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
15
Nature Chemical Biology
○ 119 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
16
Cell Chemical Biology
○ 94 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
17
Cell Reports
○ 1498 papers in training set
Top 21%
1.4%
18
Nature Structural & Molecular Biology
236 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
19
mAbs
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
20
ACS Central Science
● 71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
21
Molecular Systems Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
Science
● 477 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.0%
23
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.0%
24
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.0%
25
eBioMedicine
○ 183 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
26
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.8%
27
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.8%
28
PNAS Nexus
◐ 159 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
29
npj Antimicrobials and Resistance
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
30
Advanced Science
○ 286 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.