{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016801075268817203, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0006720430107526882, 'mean_word_length': 5.588495575221239, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Integration of Lead Discovery Tactics and the Evolution of the Lead Discovery Toolbox

There has been much debate around the success rates of various screening strategies to identify starting points for drug discovery. Although high-throughput target-based and phenotypic screening has been the focus of this debate, techniques such as fragment screening, virtual screening, and DNA-encoded library screening are also increasingly reported as a source of new chemical equity. Here, we provide examples in which integration of more than one screening approach has improved the campaign outcome and discuss how strengths and weaknesses of various methods can be used to build a complementary toolbox of approaches, giving researchers the greatest probability of successfully identifying leads. Among others, we highlight case studies for receptor-interacting serine/threonine-protein kinase 1 and the bromo- and extra-terminal domain family of bromodomains. In each example, the unique insight or chemistries individual approaches provided are described, emphasizing the synergy of information obtained from the various tactics employed and the particular question each tactic was employed to answer. We conclude with a short prospective discussing how screening strategies are evolving, what this screening toolbox might look like in the future, how to maximize success through integration of multiple tactics, and scenarios that drive selection of one combination of tactics over another.