Small-Molecule Target Identification and Deconvolution
- Convert your active compound into an ABP where needed.
- Capture direct targets and key off-targets in relevant models.
- Provide a ranked target list with concise functional notes.
Activity-based protein profiling is a chemical proteomics strategy that links small molecules to their functional protein targets in complex biological systems. By using activity-based probes rather than expression-only readouts, ABPP reveals which proteins are truly engaged and active under specific conditions. At Creative Proteomics, ABPP is applied to support small-molecule target identification, enzyme activity mapping, and mechanism-of-action studies in a range of biological models.
ABPP service highlights
Activity-based protein profiling (ABPP) combines chemistry and proteomics. Activity-based probes react covalently with active sites of specific enzyme classes or with proteins bound by a modified small molecule. Labeled proteins are then enriched and analyzed by mass spectrometry to generate a global "activity map" under defined conditions.
Unlike expression-focused proteomics, ABPP enriches only proteins that are catalytically competent or directly engaged by a probe-derived small molecule. This activity-centric view is the foundation for downstream target discovery and mechanism-of-action studies.
An ABP typically includes three functional elements:
ABPP experiments can be configured in multiple formats depending on the biological question:
These flexible formats allow ABPP to move from reductionist biochemical systems to complex tissues and in vivo models while preserving an activity-focused readout.
In drug discovery and development, ABPP helps address practical questions about which proteins are active, which are engaged by a compound, and how these events connect to phenotypes.
Conventional proteomics measures protein abundance, but many drug targets are regulated at the level of activity, not expression. ABPP focuses on catalytically active proteins, capturing only those enzymes that are "on" and able to react with the probe.
This distinction is critical when prioritizing drug targets or interpreting phenotypes, because changes in expression do not always correspond to changes in functional enzyme activity.
ABPP uses tailored probes derived from active small molecules or enzyme family–selective scaffolds. These probes form covalent bonds with target proteins, allowing unambiguous enrichment and identification by LC–MS/MS. This helps clarify primary targets, off-targets, and pathway context in one experiment.
For hit validation and lead optimization, this direct link between a small molecule and its protein binding partners provides a mechanistic basis for observed pharmacology.
Ideal for broad profiling of enzyme activity across conditions or treatment arms. This format simplifies probe delivery and allows tight control over reaction conditions.
Suitable for studying enzyme activity and small-molecule engagement in intact cells. This format captures protein activity in a more physiological context, while accounting for cell permeability and intracellular localization.
Designed for animal or tissue-based models where preserving native architecture and microenvironments is important. Sample preparation is tailored to maintain crosslinks and minimize activity loss.
Used to confirm specific binding of a lead molecule to its targets:
Fluorescent or imaging-compatible probes can be used to visualize cells or tissues, allowing qualitative assessment of probe uptake and target engagement patterns.
Different projects may require:
Creative Proteomics provides a portfolio of ABPP solutions that can be tailored to specific discovery and development needs.
| Comparison point | ABPP | Affinity pull-down (biotin / resin) | Thermal shift / target engagement (TSA, CETSA, TPP, DSC-like) | DARTS (Drug Affinity Responsive Target Stability) | Standard quantitative proteomics |
| Primary readout | Covalent labeling of catalytically active enzymes or probe-bound proteins | Physical binding of proteins to a tagged or immobilized ligand | Change in protein stability or melting behavior upon ligand binding | Protease resistance after ligand binding | Protein abundance (expression level) |
| Key question addressed | Which enzymes are active, and which proteins does my small molecule directly engage? | Which proteins bind to my compound under defined conditions? | Does my unmodified compound engage targets in cells/tissues, and how strongly? | Does my compound stabilize specific proteins against limited proteolysis? | Which proteins are up- or downregulated by treatment or genotype? |
| Sample & live-cell compatibility | Lysates, live cells, sometimes tissues; in vitro / in situ / in vivo formats | Mainly lysates; in vitro | Live cells, tissues, or lysates depending on format | Mostly lysates; sometimes cells after lysis | Lysates from cells or tissues; broad compatibility |
| Compound modification required? | Usually yes (ABP or warhead with clickable handle), or use class-selective ABPs | Yes (biotin tag or solid-support linker) | No, uses unmodified compound | No, uses unmodified compound | No |
| Key strengths | Activity-centric; distinguishes active vs inactive pools; proteome-wide target and selectivity profiling; flexible formats | Conceptually simple; good for strong binders; works for many protein classes | Direct readout of target engagement in native systems; no derivatization; scalable to proteome level | Label-free; useful as orthogonal validation for selected targets | Unbiased view of expression changes; mature, robust workflows |
| Main limitations | Needs suitable probe chemistry; not all targets can be covalently tagged; chemistry adds cost/lead time | Tags can alter binding; weak or transient interactions often missed; mainly lysate-based and not activity-selective | Reports stability, not catalytic activity; some binders show minimal thermal shift; requires careful optimization | Lower throughput and less quantitative at proteome scale; indirect readout; sensitive to protease conditions | Does not report activity or direct binding; cannot distinguish active vs inactive protein pools |
| Best suited for | Activity-centric, proteome-wide target mapping and selectivity profiling when probe chemistry is feasible | First-pass binding partner lists when ABPP probes are not yet available | Unmodified-compound target engagement in cells or tissues; orthogonal confirmation of ABPP/pulldown hits | Focused validation of a small number of candidate targets | Understanding downstream pathway and expression changes, not direct target engagement |
For conformational and interaction-induced changes complementary to ABPP, consider our LiP-MS service.
Project scoping & study design
Define biological question, model system, target classes, control groups, and comparison arms. Select lysate, live-cell, or tissue format.
Probe strategy & chemistry
Choose suitable class-selective ABPs or design a probe from your small molecule (photoaffinity and/or clickable handle) while preserving activity.
Pilot optimization
Test probe concentration, incubation time, and buffer conditions in a small panel of samples to balance sensitivity and specificity.
Sample preparation & labeling
Prepare cell or tissue lysates, live cells, or fractions. Incubate with the probe or derivatized compound under optimized conditions.
Crosslinking & click chemistry
Apply UV (for photoaffinity probes) to covalently fix probe–protein complexes, then perform click chemistry to attach biotin or other reporter tags.
Affinity enrichment & cleanup
Capture labeled proteins with streptavidin or matched matrices. Wash to remove non-specific binders and prepare material for LC–MS/MS.
Digestion & LC–MS/MS acquisition
Digest enriched proteins to peptides and run high-resolution LC–MS/MS using appropriate acquisition (DDA or DIA) and QC checks.
Data analysis & interpretation
Identify and quantify enriched proteins, compare treatment vs control, and annotate targets with pathways and functions to generate decision-ready lists.
Nano-LC autosampler and column system: Robust peptide separation before MS.
High-resolution LC–MS/MS system: Orbitrap or Q-TOF mass spectrometer coupled to nano-LC.
| Category | Requirements | Details / Notes |
| Sample types | Cell lysates, live cells, or tissue samples | Compatible with most mammalian cell lines, primary cells, and fresh/frozen tissues. |
| Minimum material | 50–200 µg total protein per condition | Amount depends on probe chemistry and enrichment depth. |
| Cell number (live-cell ABPP) | 1–5 × 10⁶ cells per condition | Adherent or suspension cells; avoid over-confluence for consistent probe uptake. |
| Lysis buffer | Mild, MS-compatible buffers | Avoid high detergents, SDS, glycerol, DTT, or components interfering with click chemistry. |
| Protease / phosphatase inhibitors | Recommended | Use inhibitor cocktails that do not contain azides, thiols, or copper chelators. |
| Sample quality | Fresh or snap-frozen; minimal freeze–thaw | Degraded or contaminated samples reduce ABPP activity detection. |
| Shipping conditions | Dry ice (frozen) / cold pack (cells) | Use clearly labeled tubes with sample name, condition, protein amount, and date. |
| Optional add-ons | Pre-lysis, protein quant, trial ABPP | We can prepare lysates, run pilot probe tests, or quantify protein before enrichment. |
Typical ABPP project outputs may include:
In-gel ABP fluorescence and total protein control showing dose-dependent competition of the target band.
Volcano plot of ABPP quantitative data, highlighting significantly enriched protein targets.
Heatmap showing clustered, dose-dependent changes in relative target activity across conditions.
Pathway map integrating ABPP targets into a glycolytic–TCA network, with node colour and size encoding activity and enrichment.
What problems does ABPP actually solve in drug discovery?
ABPP helps link a phenotype or hit compound to functional, active protein targets rather than just expression changes. It is especially useful for deconvoluting on- and off-targets in enzyme families where activity is decoupled from protein level.
Is ABPP only for covalent inhibitors?
No. Classical ABPP uses covalent warheads, but non-covalent ligands can be studied via photoaffinity probes or competitive ABPP, where the unmodified compound competes with a broad-spectrum probe.
When does ABPP make more sense than a thermal shift or CETSA-style assay?
Choose ABPP when you need a proteome-wide, activity-centric map (which enzymes are “on” and engaged) and not just a stability shift. Thermal shift / CETSA are better if you mainly want to confirm global target engagement of an unmodified drug with simpler readouts.
What kind of targets are best suited for ABPP?
ABPP works best for proteins with defined active-site chemistry, such as serine hydrolases, cysteine proteases, phosphatases, deacetylases, and many metabolic enzymes. These classes already have well-developed warheads and probe chemistries.
Can ABPP be done in live cells or tissues, or only in lysates?
Yes, ABPP can run in lysates, live cells, and in vivo / tissue settings. In practice, many projects optimize conditions in lysates first, then extend to live-cell or in vivo formats once probe uptake, toxicity, and signal quality are understood.
Do I always need a custom probe for my compound?
Not always. Many projects start from family-selective probes that already exist for a given enzyme class. Custom compound-derived probes or competitive ABPP are added when you need compound-specific selectivity and MoA data.
Online Inquiry