Functional diversity of compound libraries

Current Opinion in Chemical Biology

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 287-294

  Gorse, Dominique ^a   Lahana, Roger ^a  

^a Synt:em   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; CHEMICAL MODIFICATION; CHEMICAL REACTION; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; DNA LIBRARY; MOLECULAR MODEL; ORGANIC CHEMISTRY; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

EID: 0034074354     PISSN: 13675931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1367-5931(00)00091-0     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Kier L.B., Hall L.H. Molecular Structure Description: the Electropological State. 1999;Academic Press, London. A comprehensive description of the E-state with many references and examples. Offers strategies and recommendations for drug design. The issue of molecular representation is well addressed.
2. Matter H., Pötter T. Comparing 3D pharmacophore triplets and 2D fingerprints for selecting diverse compound subsets. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;1211-1225. A new detailed comparison of 3D pharmacophore triplets and 2D fingerprints for selecting compounds with different biological activities and in separating actives and inactives for a biological target.
3. Gillet V.J. Background theory of molecular diversity. Dean P.M., Lewis R.A. Molecular Diversity in Drug Design. 1999;43-65 Kluwer Academic Publishers, London. A good starting point for defining molecular diversity within its context. Many references are included.
4. Martin Y.C., Brown R.D., Bures M.G. Quantifying diversity. Gordon E.M., Kerwin J.F. Jr. Combinatorial Chemistry and Molecular Diversity in Drug Discovery. 1998;369-385 John Wiley & Sons, New York.
5. Brown R.D. Descriptors for diversity analysis. Perspect Drug Discov Design. 7/8:1997;31-49.
6. Agrafiotis D.K., Myslik J.C., Salemme F.R. Advances in diversity profiling and combinatorial series design. Mol Divers. 4:1999;1-22. Addresses in detail, from a technical point of view, issues related to molecular description, dimensionality reduction, compound selection and visualisation.
7. Brown R.D., Martin Y.C. The information content of 2D and 3D structural descriptors relevant to ligand-receptor binding. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 37:1997;1-9.
8. Benigni R., Gallo G., Giorgi F., Giuliani A. On the equivalence between different descriptions of molecules: value for computational approaches. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;575-578.
9. Patterson D.E., Cramer R.D., Ferguson A.M., Clark R.D., Weinberger L.E. Neighbourhood behaviour: a useful concept for validation of 'molecular diversity' descriptors. J Med Chem. 39:1996;3049-3059.
10. 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 Inform Comput Sci. 36:1996;572-584.
11. Xue L., Godden J., Gao H., Bajorath J. Identification of a preferred set of molecular descriptors for compound classification based on principal component analysis. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;699-704.
12. Xue L., Godden J.W., Bajorath J. Database searching for compounds with similar bological activity using short binary bit string representations of molecules. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;881-886.
13. Dixon S.L., Villar H.O. Investigation of classification methods for the prediction of activity in diverse chemical libraries. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 13:1999;533-545. Extended comparison of different selection techniques and molecular descriptions.
14. Bayada D.M., Hamersma H., van Geerestein V.J. Molecular diversity and representativity in chemical databases. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;1-10.
15. Gillet V.J., Schuffenhauer A., Willett P. Similarity searching in files of 3D chemical structures: analysis of the BIOSTER database using 2D fingerprints and molecular field descriptors. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 2000;. in press. Emphasizes the usefulness of data fusion for combined 2D structural and molecular field descriptors.
16. Klopman G., Tu M. Diversity analysis of 14 156 molecules tested by the National Cancer Institute for anti-HIV activity using the quantitative structure-activity relational expert system MCASE. J Med Chem. 42:1999;992-998. This work relates the use of the MCASE program to derive QSAR models from a very large non-congeneric dataset.
17. Julián-Ortiz J.V., Gálvez J., Muñoz-Collado C., García-Domenech R., Gimeno-Cardona C. Virtual combinatorial syntheses and computational screening of new potential anti-herpes compounds. J Med Chem. 42:1999;3308-3314. This paper gives a good overview of the authors' work in terms of virtual screening for anti-herpes and also antibacterial, antifungal, hypoglycaemic, broncodilatator, anti-malarial, anti-taxoplasma and anti-histamininic activities.
18. Grassy G., Calas B., Yasri A., Lahana R., Woo J., Iyer S., Kaczorek M., Floc'h R., Buelow R. Computer-assisted rational design of immunosuppressive compounds. Nat Biotechnol. 16:1998;748-752.
19. Rarey M., Dixon J.S. Feature trees: a new molecular similarity measure based on tree matching. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 12:1998;471-490.
20. Schneider G., Neidhart W., Giller T., Schmid G. 'Scaffold-hopping' by topological pharmacophore search: a contribution to virtual screening. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 38:1999;2894-2896.
21. Durand, P.J., Pasari, R., Baker, J.W., Tsai, C.: An efficient algorithm for similarity analysis of molecules. Internet Journal of Chemistry 1999, 2:article 17. [URL: http://www.ijc.com ].
22. Pearlman R.S., Smith K.M. Novel software tools for chemical diversity. Perspect Drug Discov Design. 9:1998;339-353.
23. Menard P.R., Mason J.S., Morize I., Bauerschmidt S. Chemistry space metrics in diversity analysis, library design, and compound selection. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 38:1998;1204-1213.
24. Schnur D. Design and diversity analysis of large combinatorial libraries using cell-based methods. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;36-45.
25. Stanton D.T., Morris T.W., Roychoudhury S., Parker C.N. Application of nearest-neighbor and cluster analyses in pharmaceutical lead discovery. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;21-27. An application that relates the use of BCUT descriptors with cluster analysis and nearest-neighbours analysis to find more actives after high-throughput screening.
26. Benigni R., Passerini L., Pino A., Giuliani A. The information content of eigenvalues from modified adjacency matrices: large scale and small scale correlations. Quant Struct Activ Rel. 18:1999;449-455.
27. Stanton D.T. Evaluation and use of BCUT descriptors in QSAR and QSPR studies. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;11-20.
28. Gillet V.J., Willett P., Bradshaw J. Identification of biological activity profiles using substructural analysis and genetic algorithms. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 38:1998;165-179.
29. Gorse D., Rees A., Kaczorek M., Lahana R. Molecular diversity and its analysis. Drug Discov Today. 4:1999;257-264. Describes information encoding and use in the Diverser program. The authors point out the importance of algorithm implementation that can drastically reduce time complexity in diversity evaluation and selection.
30. Bayley M.J., Willett P. Binning schemes for partition-based compound selection. J Mol Graph Model. 17:1999;10-18. Good technical description of the cell-based technique with different binning schemes.
31. Andersson P.M., Linusson A., Wold S., Sjostrom M., Lundstedt T., Norden B. Design of small libraries for lead exploration. Dean P.M., Lewis R.A. Molecular Diversity in Drug Design. 1999;197-220 Kluwer Academic Publishers, London. Interesting point of view and description of the use of multivariate analysis and experimental design in drug discovery. Focusses on the fact that well-selected and accurate biological data are better than many non-informative and crude ones.
32. Pearlman R.S., Smith K.M. Metric validation and the receptor-relevant subspace concept. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;28-35.
33. Waller C.L., Bradley M.P. Development and validation of a novel variable selection technique with application to multidimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship studies. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;345-355.
34. Rose V.S., Wood J. Generalized cluster significance analysis and stepwise cluster significance analysis with conditional probabilities. Quant Struct Activ Rel. 17:1998;348-356.
35. Worth A.P., Cronin M.T.D. Embedded cluster modelling - a novel method for analysing embedded data sets. Quant Struct Activ Rel. 18:1999;229-235.
36. Lucic B., Trinajstic N. A new efficient approach for variable selection based on multiregression: prediction of gas chromatographic retention times and response factors. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;610-621.
37. Egan W.J., Morgan S.L. Outlier detection in multivariate analytical chemical data. Anal Chem. 70:1998;2372-2379.
38. Tominaga Y. Data structure comparison using box counting analysis. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 38:1998;867-875.
39. Gillet V.J., Willett P., Bradshaw J., Green D.V.S. Selecting combinatorial libraries to optimize diversity and physical properties. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;169-177. Describes the implementation of a genetic algorithm to optimise structural and functional diversity. Examples of library design are given for two- and three-component reactions.
40. Cho S.J., Zheng W., Tropsha A. Rational combinatorial library design. 2. Rational design of targeted combinatorial peptide libraries using chemical similarity probe and the inverse QSAR approaches. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 38:1998;259-268.
41. Zheng W., Cho S.J., Tropsha A. Rational combinatorial library design. 1. Focus-2D: a new approach to the design of targeted combinatorial chemical libraries. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 38:1998;251-258.
42. Zheng W., Cho S.J., Waller C.L., Tropsha A. Rational combinatorial library design. 3. Simulated annealing guided evaluation (SAGE) of molecular diversity: a novel computational tool for universal library design and database mining. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;738-746.
43. Martin E.J., Blaney J.M., Siani M.A., Spellmeyer D.C., Wong A.K., Moos W.H. Measuring diversity: experimental design of combinatorial libraries for drug discovery. J Med Chem. 38:1995;1431-1436.
44. Martin E.J., Critchlow R.E. Beyond mere diversity: tailoring combinatorial libraries for drug discovery. J Comb Chem. 1:1999;32-45. Describes in detail the use of the experimental design approach to design combinatorial libraries. A good example of first-stage reactant selection or elimination to remove unwanted molecules from the beginning.
45. Gillet V.J., Willett P., Bradshaw J. The effectiveness of reactant pools for generating structurally-diverse combinatorial libraries. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 37:1997;731-740.
46. Good A.C., Lewis R.A. New methodology for profiling combinatorial libraries and screening sets: cleaning up the design process with HARPick. J Med Chem. 40:1997;3926-3936.
47. Leach A.R., Bradshaw J., Green D.V.S., Hann M.M. Implementation of a system for reagent selection and library enumeration, profiling, and design. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;1161-1172. Description of the program ADEPT that is based on Daylight Tools.
48. Agrafiotis D.K., Labanov V.S. An efficient implementation of distance-based diversity measure based on k-d trees. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 39:1999;51-58.
49. Turner D.B., Tyrrell S.M., Willett P. Rapid quantification of molecular diversity for selective database acquisition. J Chem Inform Comput Sci. 37:1997;18-22.
50. Willett P. Subset selection methods for chemical databases. Dean P.M., Lewis R.A. Molecular Diversity in Drug Design. 1999;115-140 Kluwer Academic Publishers, London. Full description of selection methods with high-level algorithms and many references. A large part is devoted to an overview of the evaluation and comparison of selection methods.
51. Potter T., Matter H. Random or rational design? Evaluation of diverse compound subsets from chemical structure databases. J Med Chem. 41:1998;478-488.
52. Eichler U, Ertl P, Gobbi A, Rohde B: Definition of an optimal subset of organic substituents. Interactive visual comparison of various selection algorithms. Internet Journal of Chemistry 1999, 2:article 14. URL: http://www.ijc.com ] Nice way of explaining and comparing selection algorithms in an interactive fashion.
53. Kohonen T. Self-organization and Associative Memory. 1988;Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
54. Bernard P., Golbraikh A., Kireev D., Chretien J.R., Rozhkova N. Comparison of chemical databases: analysis of molecular diversity with self organising maps (SOM). Analysis. 26:1998;233-341.