Fast similarity searching and screening hit analysis

Drug Discovery Today: Technologies

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 197-202

  Baringhaus, Karl Heinz ^a   Hessler, Gerhard ^a  

^a SANOFI AVENTIS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

6 CYCLOHEXYLMETHOXY 2 (4 SULFAMOYLANILINO)PURINE; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE 2; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE INHIBITOR; DRUG; FLAVOPIRIDOL; LIGAND; ROSCOVITINE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE MOLECULAR SIMILARITY INDICES ANALYSIS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DATA ANALYSIS; DRUG IDENTIFICATION; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG STRUCTURE; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

EID: 13344275781     PISSN: 17406749     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ddtec.2004.11.001     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. G. Schneider et al. Virtual screening and fast automated docking methods Drug Discov. Today 7 2002 64-70
2. T. Lengauer et al. Novel technologies for virtual screening Drug Discov. Today 9 2004 27-34
3. A.M. Johnson G.M. Maggiora Concepts and Applications of Molecular Similarity 1990 Wiley
4. Y.C. Martin et al. Do structurally similar molecules have similar biological activity? J. Med. Chem. 45 2002 4350-4358
5. G. Grethe T.E. Moock Similarity searching in REACCS. A new tool for the synthetic chemist J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 30 1990 511-520
6. R.D. Cramer et al. Prospective identification of biologically active structures by topomer shape similarity searching J. Med. Chem. 42 1999 3919-3933
7. J.S. Mason et al. 3D-Pharmacophores in drug discovery Curr. Pharm. Des. 7 2001 567-597
8. C.A. Lipinski et al. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 46 2001 3-26
9. R.D. Brown Y.C. Martin The information of 2D and 3D structural descriptors relevant to ligand-receptor binding J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 37 1997 1-9
10. P. Willett et al. Chemical similarity searching J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 38 1998 983-996
11. M. Rarey J.S. Dixon Feature trees: A new molecular similarity measure based on tree matching J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 12 1998 471-490
12. H. Matter M. Rarey Design and diversity analysis of compound libraries for lead discovery. In: G. Jung (Ed.) Combinatorial Organic Chemistry 1999 Wiley-VCH 409-439
13. G. Schneider et al. Scaffold-hopping by topological pharmacophore search: A contribution to virtual screening Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 38 1999 2894-2896
14. A. Böcker et al. Status of HTS data mining approaches QSAR Comb. Sci. 23 2004 207-213
15. X. Chen et al. Automated pharmacophore identification for large chemical data sets J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39 1999 887-896
16. A. Rusinko et al. III Analysis of a large structure/biological activity data set using recursive partitioning J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39 1999 1017-1026
17. M.K. Warmuth et al. Active learning with support vector machines in the drug discovery process J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43 2003 667-673
18. P. Blower et al. On combining recursive partitioning and simulated annealing to detect groups of biologically active compounds J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 42 2002 393-404
19. M.F.M. Engels et al. Smart screening: Approaches to efficient HTS Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Dev. 4 2001 275-283
20. D.K. Jones-Hertzog et al. Use of recursive partitioning in the sequential screening of G-protein-coupled receptors J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 42 1999 207-215
21. A. Teckentrup et al. Mining high-throughput screening data of combinatorial libraries: Development of a filter to distinguish hits from nonhits J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 2004 626-634