Molecular surface point environments for virtual screening and the elucidation of binding patterns (MOLPRINT 3D)

Journal of Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 47, Issue 26, 2004, Pages 6569-6583

  Bender, Andreas ^a   Mussa, Hamse Y ^a   Gill, Gurprem S ^a   Glen, Robert C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL COENZYME A REDUCTASE INHIBITOR; THROMBOXANE A2 RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BINDING AFFINITY; BINDING SITE; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONFORMATIONAL TRANSITION; DRUG SCREENING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIGAND BINDING; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; RECEPTOR BINDING; SURFACE PROPERTY; VIRTUAL REALITY;

ANGIOTENSIN-CONVERTING ENZYME INHIBITORS; BAYES THEOREM; CORTICOSTERONE; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL-COA REDUCTASE INHIBITORS; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR CONFORMATION; PLATELET ACTIVATING FACTOR; PROTEIN BINDING; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; RECEPTORS, SEROTONIN, 5-HT3; THROMBOXANE A2;

EID: 10844249112     PISSN: 00222623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jm049611i     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Johnson, M. A.; Maggiora, G. M. Concepts and Applications of Molecular Similarity; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1990.
2. Willett, P.; Barnard, J. M.; Downs, G. M. Chemical similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38, 983-996.
3. Walters, W. P.; Stahl, M. T.; Murcko, M. A. Virtual screening - an overview. Drug Discov. Today 1998, 3, 160-178.
4. Nikolova, N.; Jaworska, J. Approaches to measure chemical similarity - A review. QSAR Comb. Sci. 2004, 22, 1006-1026.
5. Kubinyi, H. Similarity and dissimilarity: A medicinal chemist's view. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. 1998, 9-11, 225-252.
6. Kubinyi, H. Chemical similarity and biological activities. J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2002, 13, 717-726.
7. Patterson, D. E.; Cramer, R. D.; Ferguson, A. M.; Clark, R. D.; Weinberger, L. E. Neighborhood behavior: a useful concept for validation of "molecular diversity" descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 1996, 39, 3049-3059.
8. Martin, Y. C.; Kofron, J. L.; Traphagen, L. M. Do structurally similar molecules have similar biological activity? J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 4350-4358.
9. Downs, G. M.; Willett, P.; Fisanick, W. Similarity Searching and Clustering of Chemical-Structure Databases Using Molecular Property Data. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34, 1094-1102.
10. Estrada, E.; Uriarte, E. Recent advances on the role of topological indices in drug discovery research. Curr. Med. Chem. 2001, 8, 1573-1588.
11. Cramer, R. D.; 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.
12. Mason, J. S.; Good, A. C.; Martin, E. J. 3-D pharmacophores in drug discovery. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2001, 7, 567-597.
13. Moreau, G.; Broto, P. Autocorrelation of a topological structure: A new molecular descriptor. Nouv. J. Chim. 1980, 4, 359-360.
14. Schneider, G.; Neidhart, W.; Giller, T.; Schmid, G. "Scaffold- hopping" by topological pharmacophore search: A contribution to virtual screening. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1999, 38, 2894-2896.
15. Broto, P.; Moreau, G.; Vandycke, C. Molecular structures - perception, auto-correlation descriptor and SAR studies - autocorrelation descriptor. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 1984, 19, 66-70.
16. 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.
17. Quinlan, J. R. Induction of Decision Trees. Mach. Learn. 1986, 1, 81-106.
18. Holliday, J. D.; Hu, C. Y.; Willett, P. Grouping of coefficients for the calculation of intermolecular similarity and dissimilarity using 2D fragment bit-strings. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen 2002, 5, 155-166.
19. Jaccard, P. Etude comparative de la distribution florale dans une portion des Alpes et des Jura. Bull. Soc. Vaudoise Sci. Nat. 1901, 37, 547-579.
20. Holliday, J. D.; Salim, N.; Whittle, M.; Willett, P. Analysis and display of the size dependence of chemical similarity coefficients. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 819-828.
21. Dixon, S. L.; Koehler, R. T. The hidden component of size in two-dimensional fragment descriptors: side effects on sampling in bioactive libraries. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 2887-2900.
22. Flower, D. R. On the properties of bit string-based measures of chemical similarity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38, 379-386.
23. Fligner, M. A.; Verducci, J. S.; Blower, P. E. A modification of the Jaccard-Tanimoto similarity index for diverse selection of chemical compounds using binary strings. Technometrics 2002, 44, 110-119.
24. Hert, J.; Willett, P.; Wilton, D. J. Comparison of fingerprint-based methods for virtual screening using multiple bioactive reference structures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1177-1185.
25. Ginn, C. M. R.; Willett, P.; Bradshaw, J. Combination of molecular similarity measures using data fusion. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. 2000, 20, 1-16.
26. Harper, G. Ph.D. Thesis, Oxford University. The Selection of Compounds for Screening in Pharmaceutical Research, 1999.
27. Harper, G.; Bradshaw, J.; Gittins, J. C.; Green, D. V. S.; Leach, A. R. Prediction of biological activity for high-throughput screening using binary kernel discrimination. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1295-1300.
28. Briem, H.; Lessel, U. In vitro and in silico affinity fingerprints: Finding similarities beyond structural classes. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. 2000, 20, 231-244.
29. MDL Drug Data Report; MDL ISIS/HOST software, MDL Information Systems, Inc.
30. Concord, Version 4.0.7, Tripos Inc., St. Louis, MO.
31. Pearlman, R. S. CONCORD: Rapid Generation of High Quality Approximate 3D Molecular Structures. Chem. Des. Autom. News 1987, 2, 5-7.
32. Sanner, M. F.; Olson, A. J.; Spehner, J. C. Reduced surface: an efficient way to compute molecular surfaces. Biopolymers 1996, 38, 305-320.
33. Stiefl, N.; Baumann, K. Mapping property distributions of molecular surfaces: algorithm and evaluation of a novel 3D quantitative structure-activity relationship technique. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 1390-1407.
34. Pascual-Ahuir, J. L.; Silla, E. GEPOL: An Improved Description of Molecular Surfaces. I. Building the Spherical Surface Set. J. Comput. Chem. 1990, 11, 1047-1060.
35. OpenBabel, http://openbabel.sourceforge.net/.
36. Goodford, P. J. A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. J. Med. Chem. 1985, 28, 849-857.
37. Pastor, M.; Cruciani, G.; McLay, I.; Pickett, S.; Clementi, S. GRid-INdependent Descriptors (GRIND): a novel class of alignment-independent three-dimensional molecular descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 3233-3243.
38. Xing, L.; Glen, R. C.; Clark, R. D. Predicting pK(a) by molecular tree structured fingerprints and PLS. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 870-879.
39. Bender, A.; Mussa, H. Y.; Glen, R. C.; Reiling, S. Molecular similarity searching using atom environments, information-based feature selection, and a naive bayesian classifier. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 170-178.
40. Glen, R. C.; A-Razzak, M. Applications of Rule-Induction in the Derivation of quantitative structure-activity relationships. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1992, 6, 349-383.
41. Mitchell, T. M. Machine Learning; McGraw-Hill: New York, 1997.
42. Domingos, P.; Pazzani, M. On the optimality of the simple Bayesian classifier under zero-one loss. Mach. Learn. 1997, 29, 103-130.
43. 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. 1997, 37, 1-9.
44. Bender, A.; Mussa, H. Y.; Glen, R. C.; Reiling, S. Similarity searching of chemical databases using atom environment descriptors: evaluation of performance. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1708-1718.
45. Rarey, M.; Dixon, J. S. Feature trees: a new molecular similarity measure based on tree matching. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1998, 12, 471-490.
46. ISIS, Version 2.1.4, Molecular Design Ltd., San Leandro, USA.
47. DAYLIGHT, Version 4.62, DAYLIGHT Inc., Mission Viejo, CA.
48. SYBYL, Version 6.5.3, HQSAR Module, Tripos Inc., St. Louis, MO.
49. Lessel, U. F.; Briem, H. Flexsim-X: a method for the detection of molecules with similar biological activity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 246-253.
50. Lemmen, C.; Lengauer, T.; Klebe, G. FLEXS: a method for fast flexible ligand superposition. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41, 4502-4520.
51. Briem, H.; Kuntz, I. D. Molecular similarity based on DOCK-generated fingerprints. J. Med. Chem. 1996, 39, 3401-3408.
52. MOE (Molecular Operating Environment), Chemical Computing Group Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
53. Istvan, E. S. Structural mechanism for statin inhibition of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase. Am. Heart J. 2002, 144, S27-32.
54. Natesh, R.; Schwager, S. L.; Sturrock, E. D.; Acharya, K. R. Crystal structure of the human angiotensin-converting enzyme-lisinopril complex. Nature 2003, 421, 551-554.
55. Cushman, D. W.; Ondetti, M. A. Design of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. Nat. Med. 1999, 5, 1110-1113.
56. Yamamoto, Y.; Kamiya, K.; Terao, S. Modeling of human thromboxane A2 receptor and analysis of the receptor-ligand interaction. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 36, 820-825.
57. Perola, E.; Charifson, P. S. Conformational analysis of drug-like molecules bound to proteins: An extensive study of ligand reorganization upon binding. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 2499-2510.
58. Marshall, C. R.; Barry, C. D.; Bosshard, H. E.; Dammkoehler, R. A.; Dunn, D. A. The Conformational Parameter in Drug Design: The Active Analogue Approach. Computer Assisted Drug Design; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1979; pp 205-226.
59. Bender, A.; Glen, R. C. Molecular similarity: a key technique in molecular informatics. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2004, 2, 3204-3218.