# Suggested drug for inclusion

**URL:** <https://community.opentargets.org/t/suggested-drug-for-inclusion/511>\
**Category:** Platform feature requests\
**Tags:** data-updates\
**Created:** [18 March 2022 09:48 UTC](https://community.opentargets.org/t/suggested-drug-for-inclusion/511 "2022-03-18T09:48:28Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SirTarget](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex017/user_avatar/community.opentargets.org/sirtarget/32/155_2.png) [@SirTarget](https://community.opentargets.org/u/SirTarget)\
**Post date:** [18 March 2022 09:48 UTC](https://community.opentargets.org/t/suggested-drug-for-inclusion/511/1 "2022-03-18T09:48:28Z")

</div>

I’d like to suggest `4-(2-Chlorophenyl)-8-(2-Hydroxyethyl)-6-Methylpyrrolo[3,4-E]indole-1,3(2h,6h)-Dione` (CHEMBL ID: 11602832) for inclusion. It’s already indirectly cross-referenced to DrugBank (DB07257) as an associated drug for WEE1, but AFAICT it has no explicit representation in OT (maybe I’m not looking in the right place?)

_This question was sent to the Open Targets helpdesk and has been posted here so that the answer can benefit the whole Community of users._

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![irene](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex017/user_avatar/community.opentargets.org/irene/32/50_2.png) [@irene](https://community.opentargets.org/u/irene)\
**Post date:** [21 March 2022 20:03 UTC](https://community.opentargets.org/t/suggested-drug-for-inclusion/511/2 "2022-03-21T20:03:18Z")

</div>

Hello!  
You are right, we do not have this compound in our molecule index as it does not appear that CHEMBL11602832 is a valid ID in ChEMBL.

However, according to our records, this compound was listed in ChEMBL under a different ID [CHEMBL1230592](https://www.ebi.ac.uk/chembl/id_lookup/CHEMBL1230592/), which unfortunately was obsoleted from ChEMBL 12 on.

From what I see it seems to be a clinically little documented compound. Do you have any kind of sensible reference we can pass on to our ChEMBL colleagues to discuss its inclusion again?

Best,  
Irene
