FLUFF-BALL, A Template-Based Grid-Independent Superposition and QSAR Technique: Validation Using a Benchmark Steroid Data Set

Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1780-1793

  Korhonen, Samuli Petrus ^a   Tuppurainen, Kari ^a   Laatikainen, Reino ^a   Peräkylä, Mikael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA SETS; MOLECULAR LIBRARIES; SUPERPOSITION PROCESS;

ALGORITHMS; AUTOMATION; CARBON; CARRIER CONCENTRATION; DISSIMILAR MATERIALS; ELECTROSTATICS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MOLECULAR ORIENTATION; NEURAL NETWORKS;

MOLECULAR STRUCTURE;

LIGAND; STEROID;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOLOGY; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DATA BASE; DNA TEMPLATE; GENE LIBRARY; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ALGORITHMS; CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DATABASES; GENE LIBRARY; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SOFTWARE; STEROIDS; TEMPLATES, GENETIC;

EID: 0348209074     PISSN: 00952338     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci034027o     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Hansch, C.; Fujita, T. ρ-σ-π Analysis. A Method for the Correlation of Biological Activity and Chemical Structure. J. Am. Chem. Soc, 1964, 86, 1616-1626.
2. Hansch, C.; Leo, A. Exploring QSAR: Fundamentals and Applications in Chemistry and Biology; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1995.
3. Cramer, R. D. III.; Patterson, D. E.; Bunce, J. D. Comparative Molecular Field Analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of Shape on Binding of Steroids to Carrier Proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 5959-5967.
4. Goodford, P. J. A Computational Procedure for Determining Energetically Favourable Binding Sites on Biologically Important Molecules. J. Med. Chem. 1985, 28, 849-857.
5. Jackson, J. E. A User's Guide to Principal Components; Wiley & Sons: 1991.
6. Rännar, S.; Lindgren, F.; Geladi, P.; Wold, S. A PLS Kernel Algorithm for Data Set With Many Variables and Fewer Objects. Part 1: Theory and algorithm. J. Chemom. 1994, 8, 111-125.
7. Höskuldsson, A. PLS Regression methods. J. Chemom. 1988, 2, 211-228.
8. Pastor, M.; Cruciani, G.; McLay, I.; Pickett, S.; Clementi, S. GRidINdependent Descriptors (GRIND): A Novel Class of AlignmentIndependent Three-Dimensional Molecular Descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 3233-3243.
9. Amat, L.; Besalu, E.; Carbo-Dorca, R. Identification of Active Molecular Sites Using Quantum-Self-Similarity Measures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 978-991.
10. Bohl, M. MTD Approach to Quantitative Structure-Activity Relatioship for Cardiotonic Steroids. Z. Naturforsch. 1985, 40, 858-862.
11. Allen, M. S.; LaLoggia, A. J.; Dorn, L. J.; Martin, M. J.; Costantino, G.; Hagen, T. J.; Koehler, K. F.; Skolnick, P.; Cook, J. M. Predictive Binding of Beta-Carboline Inverse Agonists and Antagonists via the CoMFA/GOLPE Approach. J. Med. Chem. 1992, 35, 4001-4010.
12. Miller, M. D.; Sheridan, R. P.; Kearsley, S. K. SQ: A Program for Rapidly Producing Pharmacophorically Relevent Molecular Superpositions. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 1505-1514.
13. Mcmartin, C.; Bohacek, R. S. QXP: Powerful, Rapid Computer Algorithms for Structure-Based Drug Design. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 333-344.
14. Masek, B. B.; Merchant, A.; Matthew, J. B. Molecular Shape Comparison of Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 56, 1230-1238.
15. Mestres, J.; Rohrer, D. C.; Maggiora, G. M. MIMIC: A Molecular-Field Matching Program Exploting Applicability of Molecular Similarity Approaches. J. Comput. Chem. 1997, 18, 934-954.
16. Lemmen, C.; Lengauer, T.; Klebe, G. FLEXS: A Method for Fast Flexible Ligand Superposition. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41, 4502-4520.
17. Grant, J. A.; Gallardo, M. A.; Pickup, B. T. A Fast Method of Molecular Shape Comparison: A Simple Application of a Gaussian Description of Molecular Shape. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 1653-1666.
18. Nissink, J. W. M.; Verdonk, M. L.; Kroon J.; Mietzner, T.; Klebe, G. Superposition of molecules: Electron Density Fitting by Application of Fourier Transforms. J. Comput. Chem. 1997, 18, 638-645.
19. Constans, P.; Amat, L.; Carbo-Dorca, R. Toward a Global Maximization of the Molecular Similarity Function: Superposition of Two Molecules. J. Comput. Chem. 1997, 18, 826-846.
20. Parretti, M. F.; Kroemer, R. T.; Rothman, J. H.; Richards, W. G. Alignment of Molecules by the Monte Carlo Optimization of Molecular Similarity Indices. J. Comput. Chem. 1997, 18, 1344-1353.
21. Mills, J. E. J.; Perkins, T. D. J.; Dean, P. M. An Automated Method for Predicting the Positions of Hydrogen-Bonding Atoms in Binding Sites. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 229-242.
22. Livingstone, D. J. The Characterization of Chemical Structures Using Molecular Properties. A Survey. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 195-205.
23. Kubinyi, H.; Folkers, G.; Martin, Y. C. 3D QSAR in Drug Design, Volume 2: Ligand Protein Interactions and Molecular Similarity, ESCOM: 1998.
24. Chae, Chong Hak; Oh, Dong Gweon; Shin, Wanchul Flexible Molecular Superposition: Development of a Combined Similarity Index and Application of the Constrained Optimization Technique. J. Comput. Chem. 2001, 22, 888-900.
25. Melani, F.; Gratteri, P.; Adamo, M.; Bonaccini, C. Field Interaction and Geometrical Overlap: A New Simplex and Experimental Design Based Computational Procedure for Superposing Small Ligand Molecules. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 1359-1371.
26. Broto, P.; Moreau, G.; Vandycke, C. Molecular Structures: Perception, Autocorrelation Descriptor and SAR Studies. Autocorrelation Descriptor. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 1984, 19, 66-70.
27. Wagener, M.; Sadowski, J.; Gasteiger, J. Autocorrelation of Molecular Surface Properties for Modeling Corticosteroid Binding Globulin and Cytosolic Ah Receptor Activity by Neural Networks. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 7769-7775.
28. Todeschini, R.; Vighi, M.; Provenzani, R.; Finizio, A.; Gramatica, P. Modeling and Prediction by Using WHIM Descriptors in QSAR Studies: Toxicity of Heterogeneous Chemicals on Daphnia Magna. Chemosphere 1996, 32, 1527-1545.
29. Todeschini, R.; Gramatica, P.; Provenzani, R.; Marengo, E. Weighted Holistic Invariant Molecular Descriptors. Part 2. Theory Development and Applications on Modelling Physicochemical Properties of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 1995, 27, 221-229.
30. Bravi, G.; Gancia, E.; Mascagni, P.; Pegna, M.; Todeschini, R.; Zaliani, A. MS-WHIM, New 3D Theoretical Descriptors Derived from Molecular Surface Properties: A Comparative 3D QSAR Study in a Series of Steroids. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 79-92.
31. Silverman, D. B. The Thirty-one Benchmark Steroid Revisited: Comparative Molecular Moment Analysis (CoMMA) with Principal Component Regression. QSAR 2000, 19, 237-246.
32. Robert, D.; Amat, L.; Carbo-Dorca, R. Three-Dimensional Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship from Tuned Molecular Quantum Similarity Measures: Prediction of the Corticosteroid-Binding Globulin Binding Affinity fro a Steroid Family. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1999, 39, 333-344.
33. Karelson, M.; Lobanov, V. S.; Katritzky, A. R. Quantum-Chemical Descriptors in QSAR/QSPR Studies. Chem. Rev. 1996, 96, 1027-1044.
34. Bursi, R.; Dao, T.; van Wijk, T.; de Gooyer, M.; Kellenbach, E.; Verwer, P. Comparative Spectra Analysis (CoSA): Spectra as Three-Dimensional Molecular Descriptors for the Prediction of Biological Activities. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1999, 39, 861-868.
35. Turner, D. B.; Willett, P. The EVA Spectral Descriptor. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 35, 365-375.
36. Turner, D. B.; Willett, P.; Ferguson, A. M.; Heritage, T. Evaluation of Novel Infrared Range Vibration-Based Descriptor (EVA) for QSAR Studies: General Application. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 409-422.
37. Turner, D. B.; Willett, P.; Ferguson, A. M.; Heritage, T. Evaluation of Novel Infrared Range Vibration-Based Descriptor (EVA) for QSAR Studies: 2. Model Validation Using a Benchmark Steroid Dataset. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1999, 13, 271-296.
38. Turner, D. B.; Willett, P. Evaluation of the EVA descriptor for QSAR studies: 3. The Use of a Genetic Algorithm to Search for Models with Enhanced Predictive Properties (EVA_GA). J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2000, 14, 1-21.
39. Tuppurainen, K.; Viisas, M.; Laatikainen, R.; Peräkylä, M. Evaluation of Novel Electronic Eigenvalue (EEVA) Molecular Descriptor for QSAR/QSPR Studies: Validation Using a Benchmark Steroid Data Set. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 607-613.
40. Maw, H. H.; Hall, L. H. E-State Modelling of Corticosteroids Binding Affinity Validation of Model for Small Data Set. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1248-1254.
41. Kellogg, G. E.; Kier, L. B.; Gillard, P.; Hall, L. H. E-State fields: Applications to 3D QSAR. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1996, 10, 513-520.
42. Cho, S. J.; Tropsha, A. Cross-Validated R2-guided Region Selection for Comparative Molecular Field Analysis: A Simple Method to Achieve Consistent Results. J. Med. Chem. 1995, 38, 1060-1066.
43. Klebe, G.; Abraham, U.; Mietzner, T. Molecular Similarity Indices in a Comparative Analysis (CoMSIA) of Drug Molecules to Correlate and Predict Their Biological Activity. J. Med. Chem. 1994, 37, 4130-4146.
44. Robinson, D. D.; Winn, P. J.; Lyne, P. D.; Richards, W. G. Self-Organizing Molecular Field Analysis: A Tool for Structure-Activity Studies. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 573-583.
45. Hopfinger, A. J.; Wang, S.; Tokarski, J. S.; Baiqiang, J.; Albuquerque, M.; Madhav, P. J.; Duraiswami, C. Construction of 3D-QSAR Models using the 4D-QSAR Analysis Formalism. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 10509-10524.
46. Vedani, A. 5D-QSAR: The Key for Simulating Induced Fit. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 2139-2149.
47. Carbo, R.; Leyda, L.; Arnau, M. How Similar is a Molecule to Another? An Electron Density Measure of Similarity Between Two Molecular Structures. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 1980, 17, 1185-1189.
48. Good, A. C.; Hodgkin, E. E.; Richards, W. G. Utilization of Gaussian Function for the Rapid Evaluation of Molecular Similarity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1992, 32, 188-191.
49. Good, A.; So, S.-S.; Richards, G. Structure-Activity Relationships from Molecular Similarity Matrices. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 36, 433-438.
50. Good, A. C.; Peterson, S. J.; Richards, W. G. QSAR's from Similarity Matrices. Technique Validation and Application in the Comparison of Different Similarity Evaluation Methods. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 36, 2929-2937.
51. Benigni, R.; Cotta-Ramusino, M.; Giorgi, F.; Gallo, G. Molecular Similarity Matrixes and Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship: A Case Study with Methodological Implications. J. Med. Chem. 1995. 38, 629-635.
52. Halgren, T. A. Merck Molecular Force Field. I. Basis, Form, Scope, Parametrization, and Performance of MMFF94. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 490-519.
53. Halgren, T. A. Merck Molecular Force Field. IL MMFF94 van der Waals and Electrostatic Parameters for Intermolecular Interactions. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 520-552.
54. Halgren, T. A. Merck Molecular Force Field. III. Molecular Geometries and Vibrational Frequencies for MMFF94. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 553-586.
55. Halgren, T. A. Merck Molecular Force Field. IV. Conformational Energies and Geometries for MMFF94. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 587-615.
56. Halgren, T. A. Merck Molecular Force Field. V. Extension of MMFF94 Using Experimental Data, Additional Computational Data, and Empirical Rules. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 616-641.
57. Kearsley, S. K.; Smith, G. M. An Alternate Method for the Alignment of Molecular Structures: Maximizing Electrostatic and Steric Overlap. Tetrahedron Comput. Methodol. 1990, 3, 615-633.
58. Polanski, J.; Walczak, B. The Comparative Molecular Surface Analysis (COMSA): a Novel Tool for Molecular Design. Comput. Chem. 2000, 24, 615-625.
59. Coats, E. A. The CoMFA steroids as a Benchmark Dataset for Development of 3D QSAR Methods. Perspect. Drug Discovery Des. 1998, 12-14, 199-213.
60. van de Waterbeemd, H.; Testa, B.; Folkers, G. Computer-Assisted Lead Finding and Optimization: Current Tools for Medicinal Chemistry. In A General View on Similarity and QSAR Studies; Kubinyi, H., Ed.; VHCA: Basel, Switzerland, 1997; pp 7-28.
61. Gantchev, T. G.; Ali, H.; van Lier, J. E. Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship/Comparative Molecular Field Analysis (QSAR/CoMFA) for Receptor-Binding Properties of Halogenated Estratriol Derivatives. J. Med. Chem. 1994, 37, 4164-4176.
62. Wiese, T. E.; Polin, L. A.; Palomino, E.; Brooks, S. C. Induction of the Estrogen Specific Mitogenic Response of MCF-7 Cells by Selected Analogues of Estradiol-17/β: A 3D QSAR Study. J. Med. Chem. 1997, 40, 3659-3669.
63. Tuppurainen, K.; Ruuskanen, J. Electronic Eigenvalue (EEVA): a New QSAR/QSPR Descriptor for Electronic Substituent Effects Based on Molecular Orbital Energies. A QSAR Approach to Ah Receptor Binding Affinity of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), Dibenzo-p-Dioxins (PCDDs) and Dibenzofurans (PCDFs). Chemosphere 2000, 41, 843-848.
64. So, S.-S.; Karplus, M. Three-Dimensional Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship from Molecular Similarity Matrices and Neural Networks. 2. Applications. J. Med. Chem. 1997, 40, 4360-4371.
65. Waller, C. L.; McKinney, J. D. Comparative Molecular Field Analysis of Polyhalogenated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins, Dibenzofurans, and Biphenyls. J. Med. Chem. 1992, 35, 3660-3666.
66. Poso, A.; Tuppurainen, K.; Ruuskanen, J.; Gynther, J. Binding of Some Dioxins and Dibenzofurans to the Ah Receptor. A QSAR Model Based on Comparative Molecular Field Analysis (CoMFA). J. Mol. Struct.: THEOCHEM 1993, 282, 259-264.
67. Jain, A. N.; Koile, K.; Chapman, D. Compass: Predicting Biological Activities from Molecular Surface Properties. J. Med. Chem. 1994, 37, 2315-2327.
68. Chen, H.; Zhou, J.; Xie, G. PARM: A Genetic Evolved Algorithm to Predict Bioactivity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38, 243-250.
69. Palyulin, V. A.; Radchenko, E. V.; Zefirov, N. S. Molecular Field Topology Analysis Method in QSAR Studies of Organic Compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 659-667.
70. Liu, S.-S.; Yin, C.-S.; Li, Z.-L.; Cai, S.-X. QSAR Study of Steroid Benchmark and Dipeptides Based on MEDV-13. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 321-329.