Consideration of molecular weight during compound selection in virtual target-based database screening

Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 267-272

  Pan, Yongping ^a   Huang, Niu ^a   Cho, Sam ^a   MacKerell Jr , Alexander D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF PHARMACY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPOUND SELECTION; VIRTUAL DATABASE SCREENING;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATABASE SYSTEMS; LEAD COMPOUNDS; MOLECULAR WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION; SCREENING;

MOLECULAR WEIGHT;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER INTERFACE; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG SCREENING; FACTUAL DATABASE; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; STATISTICS;

COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 0037208312     PISSN: 00952338     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci020055f     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Walters, W. P.; Stahl, M. T.; Murcko, M. A. Virtual screening-an overview. Drug Discovery Today 1998, 3, 160-178.
2. Gane, P. J.; Dean, P. M. Recent advances in structure-based rational drug design. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2000, 10, 401-404.
3. Burkhard, P.; Hommel, U.; Sanner, M.; Walkinshaw, M. D. The discovery of steroids and other novel FKBP inhibitors using a molecular docking program. J. Mol. Biol. 1999, 287, 853-858.
4. Godden, J. W.; Stahura, F.; Bajorath, J. Evaluation of docking strategies for virtual screening of compound databases: camp-dependent serine/threonine kinase as an example. J. Mol. Graphics Mod. 1999, 16, 139-143.
5. Filikov, A. V.; Monan, V.; Vickers, T. A.; Griffey, R. H.; Cook, P. D.; Abagyan, R. A.; James, T. L. Identification of ligands for RNA targets via structure-based virtual screening: HIV-1 TAR. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2000, 14, 593-610.
6. Perola, E.; Xu, K.; Kollmeyer, T. M.; Kaufmann, S. H.; Predergast, F. G.; Pang, Y. P. Successful virtual screening of a chemical database for farnesyltransferase inhibitor leads. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 401-408.
7. Bissantz, C., Folkers, G.; Rognan, D. Protein-Based Virtual Screening of Chemical Databases. 1. Evaluation of Different Docking/Scoring Combinations. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 4759-4767.
8. Chen, I.-J.; Nieamati, N.; Nicklaus, M. C.; Or, A.; Anderson, L.; Barchi, J. J., Jr.; Kelley, J. A.; Pommier, Y.; MacKerell, A. D., Jr. Identification of HIV-1 Integrase Inhibitors via Three-Dimensional Database Searching Using ASV and HIV-1 Integrases as Targets. Bioorg., Med. Chem. 2000, 8, 2385-2398.
9. Stahl, M.; Rarey, M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 1035-1042.
10. Pearlman, D. A.; Charifson, P. S. Are free energy calculations useful in practice? A comparison with rapid scoring functions for the p38 MAP kinase protein system. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 3417-3423.
11. Enyedy, I. J.; Ling, Y.; Nacro, K.; Tomita, Y.; Wu X.; Cao, Y.; Guo, R.; Li, B.; Zhu, X.; Huang, Y.; Long, Y.-Q.; Roller, P. P.; Yang, D.; Wang, S. Discovery of Small-Molecule Inhibitors of Bcl-2 through Structure-Based Computer Screening. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 4313-4324.
12. Makino, S.; Kuntz, I. D. Automated Flexible Ligand Docking Method and Its Application for Database Search. J. Comput. Chem. 1997, 18, 1812-1825.
13. Rarey, M.; Kramer, B.; Lengauer, T.; Klebe, G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J. Mol. Biol. 1996, 261, 470-489.
14. Muegge, I.; Martin, Y. C.; Hajduk, P. J.; Fesik, S. W. Evaluation of PMF Scoring in Docking Weak Lignads to the FK506 Binding Protein. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 2498-2503.
15. Muegge, I.; Martin, Y. C. A General and Fast Scoring Function for Protein-Ligand Interactions: A simplified Potential Approach. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 791-804.
16. Gohlke, H.; Hendlich, M.; Klebe, G. Knowledge-based Scoring Function to Predict Protein-Ligand Interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 2000, 295, 337-356.
17. Pearlman, D. A.; Charifson, P. S. Improved Scoring of Ligand-Protein Interactions Using OWFEG Free Energy Grids. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 502-511.
18. Charifson, P. S.; Corkery, J. J.; Murcko, M. A.; Walters, W. P. Consensus Scoring: A Method for Obtaining Improved Hit Rates from Docking Databases of Three-Dimensional Structures into Proteins. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 5100-5109.
19. Gohlke, H. and Klebe, G. Statistical potentials and scoring functions applied to protein-ligand binding, Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2001, 11, 231-235.
20. Wang, R.; Wang, S. How Does Consensus Scoring Work for Virtual Library Screening? An Idealized Computer Experiment. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1422-1426.
21. Pegg, S. C.-H.; Haresco, J. J.; Kuntz, I. D. A genetic algorithm for structure-based de novo design. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 911-933.
22. Kuntz, I. D.; Chen, K.; Sharp, K.; Kollman, P. A. The maximal affinity of ligands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 9997-10002.
23. Craigie, R. HIV Integrase, a brief overview from chemistry to therapeutics. J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276, 23213-23216.
24. Milne, G. W. A.; Nicklaus, M. C.; Driscoll, J. S.; Wang, S.; Zaharevitz, D. National Cancer Institute Drug Information System 3D Database. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34, 1219-1224.
25. WDI: World Drug Index: Version 4/99, Derwent Information, 1999 (www.derwent.com).
26. See http://www.chemdiv.com.
27. Teague, S. J.; Davis, A. M.; Leeson, P. D.; Opera, T. The Design of Leadlike Combinatorial Libraries. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1999, 38, 3743-3748.
28. SYBYL, version 6.7; Tripos Associates: St Louis MO, 2000.
29. Meng, E. C.; Shoichet, B. K.; Kuntz, I. D. Automatic docking with grid-based energy evaluation. J. Comput. Chem. 1992, 13, 505-524.
30. Lee, B.; Richards, F. M. The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. J. Mol. Biol. 1971, 55, 379-400.
31. Brooks, B. R.; Bruccoleri, R. E.; Olafson, B. D.; States, D. J.; Swaminathan, S.; Karplus, M. CHARMM: A program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. J. Comput. Chem. 1983, 2, 187-217.
32. Halgren, T. A. Merck molecular force field: I. Basis, form, scope, parametrization and performance of MMFF. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 490-519.
33. 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 Delivery Rev. 2001, 46, 3-26.
34. Oprea, T. I., Davis, A.; Teague, S. J.; Leeson, P. D. Is there a difference between leads and drugs? A historical perspective. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1380-1315.
35. DeWitte, R. S.; Shaknovitch, E. I. SMoG: de Novo Design Method Based on Simple, Fast and Accurate Free Energy Estimates. 1. Methodology and Supporting Evidence. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 11733-11744.
36. Loncharich, R. J.; Brooks, B. R.; Pastor, R. W. Langevin Dynamics of Peptides: The Frictional Dependence of Isomerization Rates of N-Acetylalanyl-N'-Methylamide. Biopolymers 1992, 32, 523-535.