Extraction of pharmacophore information from high-throughput screens

Current Opinion in Biotechnology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 97-103

  Hopfinger, Anton J ^a   Duca, José S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALCULATION; DATA ANALYSIS; DRUG SCREENING; MOLECULAR MODEL; PHARMACOPHORE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REVIEW;

EID: 0033952257     PISSN: 09581669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0958-1669(99)00061-0     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Foye W.O. Principles of Medicinal Chemistry. 1989;Lea and Feibiger, Philadelphia.
2. Murray C.M., Cato S.J. Design of libraries to explore receptor sites. J Chem Inf Computer Sci. 39:1999;46-50.
3. Pickett S.D., Luttmann C., Guerin V., Laoui A., James E. DIVSEL and COMPLIB - strategies for the design and comparison of combinatorial libraries using pharmacophoric descriptors. J Chem Inf Computer Sci. 38:1998;144-150.
4. Dixon S.L., Villar H.O. Bioactivity diversity and screening library selection via affinity fingerprinting. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 38:1998;1192-1203.
5. Bures M.G., Martin Y.C. Computational methods in molecular diversity and combinatorial chemistry. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2:1998;376-380.
6. Bollobas B. Modern Graph Theory. 1998;Springer Verlag, New York.
7. Brown R.D. Descriptors for diversity analysis. Perspect Drug Discov Des. 7-8:1997;31-49.
8. Menard P.R., Mason J.S., Morize I., Bauerschmidt S. Chemistry space metrics in diversity analysis, library design, and compound selection. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 38:1998;1204-1213.
9. Zheng W.F., Cho S.J., Trophsa A. Rational combinatorial library design. 1. Focus-2D: a new approach to the design of targeted combinatorial libraries. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 38:1998;251-258.
10. Lipinski C.A., Lombardo F., Dominy B.W., Feeney P.J. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 23:1997;3-25.
11. Brown R.D., Martin Y.C. Use of structure-activity data to compare structure-based clustering methods and descriptors for use in compound selection. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 36:1996;572-584.
12. Brown R.D., Martin Y.C. The information content of 2D and 3D structural descriptors relevant to ligand-receptor binding. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 36:1996;1-9.
13. Stanton D.T. Evaluation and use of BCUT descriptors in QSAR and QSPR studies. J Chem Inf Computer Sci. 39:1999;11-20.
14. Hopfinger A.J., Reaka A., Venkatarangan P., Duca J.S., Wang S. Construction of a virtual high throughput screen by 4D-QSAR analysis: application to a combinatorial library of glucose inhibitors of glycogen phosphorylase b. J Chem Inf Computer Sci. 39:1999;1151-1160.
15. Walters W.P., Stahl M.T., Murcko M.A. Virtual screening: an overview. Drug Discov Today. 3:1998;160-194.
16. Kearsley S.K., Sallamack S., Fluder E.M., Andose J.D., Mosley R.T., Sheridan R.P. Chemical similarity using physicochemical property descriptors. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 36:1996;118-127.
17. Agrafiotis D.K., Myslik J.C., Salemme F.R. Advances in diversity profiling and combinatorial series design. Mol Divers. 4:1999;1-22. A good overview of diversity and library design methods.
18. Eichler U., Ertl P., Gobbi A., Poppinger D. Addressing the problem of molecular diversity. Drugs Future. 24:1999;177-190. A good description of the current status and future of diversity analysis.
19. Lewis R.A., Mason J.S., McLay I.M. Similarity measures for rational set selection and analysis of combinatorial libraries: the diverse property-derived (DPD) approach. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 37:1997;599-614.
20. Briem D., Kuntz I.D. Molecular similarity based on DOCK-generated fingerprints. J Med Chem. 39:1996;3401-3408.
21. Hopfinger A.J., Tokarski J.S. Practical applications of computer-aided drug design. Charifson P.S. Practical Application of Computer-Aided Design. 1997;105-164 Marcel-Dekker, New York.
22. Kubinyi H., Martin Y., Folkers G. 3D-QSAR and Drug, Design:, Recent, Advances. 1997;Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
23. Cramer R.D. III, Paterson D.E., Bunce J.D. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steriods to carrier proteins. J Am Chem Soc. 110:1988;5959-5967.
24. Glen W.G., Dunn W.J. III, Scott D.R. Principal components analysis and partial least squares. Tetrahedron Comput Methods. 2:1989;349-354.
25. Klebe G., Abraham U. Comparative molecular similarity analysis (CoMSIA) to study hydrogen-bonding properties and to score combinatorial libraries. J Comput Aided Drug Des. 13:1999;1-10.
26. Hopfinger A.J., Wang S., Tokarski J.S., Jin B., Albuquerque M., Madhav P., Duraiswami C. Construction of 3D-QSAR models using the 4D-QSAR analysis formalism. J Am Chem Soc. 119:1997;10509-10524.
27. 2 receptor antagonists. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 38:1998;925-938.
28. Venkataragan P., Hopfinger A.J. Prediction of ligand-receptor binding free energy by 4D-QSAR analysis: application to a set of glucose inhibitors of glycogen phosphorylase. J Chem Inf Computer Sci. 39:1999;1141-1150.
29. Rogers D., Hopfinger A.J. Applications of the genetic function approximation to quantitative structure-activity relationships and quantitative structure-property relations. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 34:1999;854-866.
30. Martin J.L., Johnson L.N., Withers S.G. Comparison of the binding of glucose and glucose-phosphate derivatives to T-state glycogen phosphorylase. Biochemistry. 29:1990;10745-10757.
31. Stanton D.T., Morris T.W., Roychoudhury S., Parker C.N. Application of nearest-neighbor and cluster analyses in pharmaceutical lead discovery. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 39:1999;11-20.
32. Mason J.S., Pickett S.D. Partition-based selection. Perspect Drug Discov. 7/8:1997;85-114.
33. Cramer R.D. III, Patterson D.E., Clark R.D., Soltanshahi F., Lawless M.S. Virtual compound libraries: a new approach to decision making in molecular discovery research. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 38:1998;1010-1023. Easy to read overview of applications of diversity in virtual design of compound libraries.
34. Mason J.S., Morize I., Menard P.R., Cheney D.L., Hulme C., Labaudiniere R.F. New 4-point pharmacophore method for molecular similarity and diversity applications: overview of the method and applications, including a novel approach to the design of combinatorial libraries containing privileged substructures. J Med Chem. 38:1998;144-150.
35. Briem D., Kuntz I.D. Molecular similarity based on DOCK-generated fingerprints. J Med Chem. 39:1996;3401-3408.
36. Muegge I., Martin Y.C. A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. J Med Chem. 42:1999;791-804.