Drug-like annotation and duplicate analysis of a 23-supplier chemical database totalling 2.7 million compounds

Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 643-651

  Baurin, N ^a   Baker, R ^a   Richardson, C ^a   Chen, I ^a   Foloppe, N ^a   Potter, A ^a   Jordan, A ^a   Roughley, S ^a   Parratt, M ^a   Greaney, P ^a   Morley, D ^a   Hubbard, R E ^a  

^a Vernalis PLC   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHARACTERIZATION; CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS; DATA PROCESSING; DATABASE SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MECHANICAL PERMEABILITY; MEMBRANES; MOLECULES; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; SOLUBILITY;

DRUG DISCOVERY; DRUG LIKE FILTERS; DRUG LIKE PROPERTIES; MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY TRACTABILITY; PASSIVE MEMBRANE PERMEABILITY; SUPPLIER CHEMICAL DATABASE;

DRUG PRODUCTS;

EID: 11144354973     PISSN: 00952338     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci034260m     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. 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. 1997, 23, 3-25.
2. Oprea, T. I. Current trends in lead discovery: are we looking for the appropriate properties? Mol. Divers. 2002, 5, 199-208.
3. Oprea, T. I.; Davis, A. M.; Teague, S. J.; Leeson, P. D. Is There a Difference between Leads and Drugs? A Historical Perspective. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1308-1315.
4. Bajorath, J. Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2002, 1, 882-894.
5. Van de Waterbeemd, H. G. E. ADMET in silico modelling: towards prediction paradise? Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 192-204.
6. Muegge, I. Selection criteria for drug-like compounds. Med. Res. Rev. 2003, 23, 302-321.
7. Veder, D. F.; Johnson, S. R.; Cheng, H.-Y.; Smith, B. R.; Ward, K. W.; Kopple, K. D. Molecular Properties That Influence the Oral Bioavailability of Drug Candidates. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 2615-2623.
8. Oprea, T. I.; Gottfries, J.; Sherbukhin, V.; Svensson, P.; Kuhler, T. C. Chemical information management in drug discovery: optimizing the computational and combinatorial chemistry interfaces. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2000, 18, 512-524.
9. Ajay, A. W. W. P.; Murcko, M. A. Can we learn to distinguish between "drug-like" and "nondrug-like" molecules? J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41, 3314-3324.
10. Frimurer, T. M.; Bywater, R.; Naerum, L.; Lauritsen, L. N.; Brunak, S. Improving the odds in discriminating "drug-like" from "non drug-like" compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 1315-1324.
11. Walters, W. P.; Stahl, M. T.; Murcko, M. A. Virtual screening - an overview. Drug Discov. Today. 1998, 160-178.
12. Bergstrom, C. A. S.; Strafford, M.; Lazorova, L.; Avdeef, A.; Luthman, K.; Artursson, P. Current Absorption Classification of Oral Drugs Based on Molecular Surface Properties. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 558-570.
13. Wright, T. G. V. J.; Green, D. V.; Pickett, S. D. Optimizing the size and configuration of combinatorial libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 381-390.
14. Alanine, A. N. M.; Roberts, E.; Thomas, A. W. Lead generation - enhancing the success of drug discovery by investing in the hit to lead process. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2003, 51-66.
15. Voigt, J. H.; Bienfait, B.; Wang, S.; Nicklaus, M. C. Comparison of the NCI open database with seven large chemical structural databases. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 702-712.
16. Mozziconacci, J.-C. A. E.; Baurin, N.; Marot, C.; Morin-Allory, L. Preparation of a molecular database from a set of 2 million compounds for virtual screening applications: gathering, structural analysis and filtering. Electronic Communication, 9th Electronic Conference of Computational Chemistry ECCC9, April, 2003. http://www.univ-orleans.fr/SCIENCES/ICOA/eposter/eccc9/ECCC9i.htm.
17. MDL Information Systems, Inc., 14600 Catalina Street, San Leandro, CA 94577, U.S.A. http://www.mdl.com.
18. Weininger, D. SMILES 1. Introduction and encoding rules. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1988, 28, 31-36.
19. Wall, L. C. T.; Orwant, J. In Programming Perl; O'Reilly, T., Ed.; O'Reilly & Associates: Sebastopol.
20. Feuerstein, S. P. B. In Oracle PL/SQL; O'Reilly, T., Ed.; O'Reilly & Associates: Sebastopol, 1997.
21. Wegner, J. K.; Zell, A. Prediction of aqueous solubility and partition coefficient optimized by a genetic algorithm based descriptor selection method. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 1077-84.
22. Ran, Y.; Jain, N.; Yalkowsky, S. H. Prediction of aqueous solubility of organic compounds by the general solubility equation (GSE). J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1208-17.
23. Myrdal, P. B.; Manka, A. M.; Yalkowsky, S. H. AQUADAC 3: Aqueous Functional Group Activity Coefficients: Application to the estimation of aqueous solubility. Chemosphere 1995, 30, 1619-1637.
24. Livingstone, D. J.; Ford, M. G.; Huuskonen, J. J.; Salt, D. W. Simultaneous prediction of aqueous solubility and octanol/water partition coefficient based on descriptors derived from molecular structure. J. Comput.-Aided. Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 741-52.
25. Huuskonen, J.; Rantanen, J.; Livingstone, D. Prediction of aqueous solubility for a diverse set of organic compounds based on atom-type electrotopological state indices. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 35, 1081-8.
26. Gao, H.; Shanmugasundaram, V.; Lee, P. Estimation of aqueous solubility of organic compounds with QSPR approach. Pharm. Res. 2002, 19, 497-503.
27. Butina, D.; Gola, J. M. Modeling aqueous solubility. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 837-41.
28. Physical Properties Database (PHYSPROP). Syracuse Research Corporation. http://esc.syrres.com/interkow/PhysProp.htm.
29. Huuskonen, J. Estimation of Aqueous Solubility for a Diverse Set of Organic Compounds Based on Molecular Topology. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 773-777.
30. Wildman, S. A.; Crippen, G. M. Prediction of Physiochemical Parameters by Atomic Contributions. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1999, 39, 868-873.
31. Ertl, P.; Rohde, B.; Selzer, P. Fast Calculation of Molecular Polar Surface Area as a Sum of Fragment-Based Contributions and Its Application to the Prediction of Drug Transport Properties. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 3714-3717.
32. Gasteiger, J.; Marsili, M. Iterative Partial Equalization of Orbital Electronegativity - A Rapid Access to Atomic Charges. Tetrahedron 1980, 36, 3219.
33. Molecular Operating Environment (MOE). 2002.03. Chemical Computing Group Inc., Montreal, H3A 2R7 Canada, http://www.chem-comp.com.
34. Klopman, G.; Zhu, H. Estimation of the aqueous solubility of organic molecules by the group contribution approach. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 439-445.
35. Bush, B.; Nachbar, R. B. Sample-distance partial least squares: PLS optimized for many variables, with application to CoMFA. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1993, 7, 587-619.
36. Tetko, I. V.; Tanchuk, V. Y.; Kasheva, T. N.; Villa, A. E. Estimation of aqueous solubility of chemical compounds using E-state indices. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1488-1493.
37. Artursson, P. P. K.; Luthman, K. Caco-2 monolayers in experimental and theoretical predictions of drug transport. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 1996, 22, 67-84.
38. Egan, W. J.; Lauri, G. Prediction of intestinal permeability. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2002, 54, 273-289.
39. Petitjean, M. Applications of the Radius-Diameter Diagram to the Classification of Topological and Geometrical Shapes of Chemical Compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1992, 32, 331-337.
40. Stenberg, P.; Norinder, U.; Luthman, K.; Artursson, P. Experimental and computational screening models for the prediction of intestinal drug absorption. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 1927-1937.