Docking: Successes and challenges

Current Pharmaceutical Design

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 323-333

  Mohan, Venkatraman ^a   Gibbs, Alan C ^a   Cummings, Maxwell D ^b   Jaeger, Edward P ^b   DesJarlais, Renee L ^b  

^a JOHNSON AND JOHNSON   (United States)

^b Eagleview Corporate Center   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALANINE RACEMASE; AMINOGLYCOSIDE; BETA LACTAMASE; CASEIN KINASE II; CISPLATIN; CONGOCIDINE; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE 4; DACTINOMYCIN; DAUNORUBICIN; DNA; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR; GLUCOCORTICOID RECEPTOR; HORMONE RECEPTOR; INTEGRASE; INTEGRASE INHIBITOR; KINESIN; PHOSPHORIBOSYLTRANSFERASE; PHOSPHOTRANSFERASE; PHOSPHOTRANSFERASE INHIBITOR; PROTEIN FARNESYLTRANSFERASE; PROTEINASE; PROTEINASE INHIBITOR; RIBONUCLEASE; RNA; STAUROSPORINE; STEROID; THYMIDYLATE SYNTHASE; THYROID HORMONE RECEPTOR; UNINDEXED DRUG;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ANALYTIC METHOD; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DATA BASE; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; DRUG RECEPTOR BINDING; DRUG TARGETING; GENETIC ALGORITHM; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR RECOGNITION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; PROTEIN TARGETING; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; SOLVENT EFFECT; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; LIGANDS; MEMBRANE PROTEINS; PROTEIN BINDING; TECHNOLOGY, PHARMACEUTICAL;

EID: 14044262243     PISSN: 13816128     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/1381612053382106     Document Type: Review

References (139)

1. Kuntz ID, Blaney JM, Oatley SJ, Langridge R, Ferrin TE. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol 1982; 161: 269-88.
2. DesJarlais RL, Sheridan RP, Seibel GL, Dixon JS, Kuntz ID, Venkataraghavan R. Using shape complementarity as an initial screen in designing ligands for a receptor binding site of known three-dimensional structure. J Med Chem 1988; 31: 722-9.
3. Rarey M, Kramer B, Lengauer T, Klebe G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J Mol Biol 1996; 261: 470-89.
4. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC, Leach AR, Taylor R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J Mol Biol 1997; 267: 727-48.
5. Abagyan R, Totrov M, Kuznetsov D. ICM - a new method for protein modelling and design. Applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation. J Comput Chem 1994; 15: 488-506.
6. MDDR, www.mdl.com/products/knowledge/drug⊣ta_report/index.jsp.
7. CMC, www.mdl.com/products/knowledge/medicinal_chem/index.jsp.
8. ACD, www.mdl.com/products/experiment/available_chem÷r/index.jsp.
9. CSD, www.ccdc.cam.ac.uk/prods/csd/csd.html.
10. NCI, www.mdl.com/products/knowledge/cancer_db/index.jsp.
11. Ajay, Murcko MA. Computational methods to predict binding free energy in ligand-receptor complexes. J Med Chem 1995; 38: 4953-67.
12. Bohm H-J, Stahl M. Rapid empirical scroing functions in virtual screening. Med Chem Res 1999; 9: 445-462.
13. Tame JR. Scoring functions: a view from the bench. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1999; 13: 99-108.
14. Charifson PS, Corkery JJ, Murcko MA, Walters WP. Consensus scoring: A method for obtaining improved hit rates from docking databases of three-dimensional structures into proteins. J Med Chem 1999; 42: 5100-9.
15. Taylor RD, Jewsbury PJ, Essex JW. A review of protein-small molecule docking methods. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002; 16: 151-66.
16. Halperin I, Ma B, Wolfson H, Nussinov R. Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions. Proteins 2002; 47: 409-43.
17. Shoichet BK, McGovern SL, Wei B, Irwin JJ. Lead discovery using molecular docking. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2002; 6: 439-46.
18. Muegge I, Rarey M. In Lipkowitz KB, Boyd DB. Ed, Reviews in Computational chemistry, New York, John Wiley & Sons 2001; 17: 1-60.
19. Abagyan R, Totrov M. High-throughput docking for lead generation. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2001; 5: 375-82.
20. Finding the Flaws, http://www.phy.cam.ac.uk/camphy/dna/dna13_1.htm.
21. Molecular Networks GmbH, Erlangen, Germany.
22. Tripos: St. Louis, MO, USA.
23. SciTegic: San Diego, CA, USA.
24. Muegge I. The effect of small changes in protein structure on predicted binding modes of known inhibitors of influenza virus neuraminidase: PMF-scoring in DOCK4. Med Chem Res 1999; 9: 490-500.
25. McGovern SL, Shoichet BK. Information decay in molecular docking screens against holo, apo, and modeled conformations of enzymes. J Med Chem 2003; 46: 2895-907.
26. Schapira M, Abagyan R, Totrov M. Nuclear hormone receptor targeted virtual screening. J Med Chem 2003; 46: 3045-59.
27. Davis AM, Teague SJ, Kleywegt GJ. Application and Limitations of X-ray Crystallographic Data in Structure-Based Ligand and Drug Design. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2003; 42: 2718-36.
28. Kleywegt GJ, Henrick K, Dodson EJ, van Aalten DM. Pound-wise but penny-foolish: How well do micromolecules fare in macromolecular refinement? Structure (Camb) 2003; 11: 1051-9.
29. Bostrom J. Reproducing the conformations of protein-bound ligands: a critical evaluation of several popular conformational searching tools. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2001; 15: 1137-52.
30. Hopkins SC, Vale RD, Kuntz ID. Inhibitors of kinesin activity from structure-based computer screening. Biochemistry 2000; 39: 2805-14.
31. Tondi D, Slomczynska U, Costi MP, Watterson DM, Ghelli S, Shoichet BK. Structure-based discovery and in-parallel optimization of novel competitive inhibitors of thymidylate synthase. Chem Biol 1999; 6: 319-31.
32. Aronov AM, Munagala NR, Ortiz De Montellano PR, Kuntz ID, Wang CC. Rational design of selective submicromolar inhibitors of Tritrichomonas foetus hypoxanthine-guanine-xanthine phosphoribosyltransferase. Biochemistry 2000; 39: 4684-91.
33. Perola E, Xu K, Kollmeyer TM, Kaufmann SH, Prendergast FG, Pang YP. Successful virtual screening of a chemical database for farnesyltransferase inhibitor leads. J Med Chem 2000; 43: 401-8.
34. Burkhard P, Hommel U, Sanner M, Walkinshaw MD. The discovery of steroids and other novel FKBP inhibitors using a molecular docking program. J Mol Biol 1999; 287: 853-8.
35. Olson AJ, Goodsell DS. Automated docking and the search for HIV protease inhibitors. SAR QSAR Environ Res 1998; 8: 273-85.
36. Powers RA, Morandi F, Shoichet BK. Structure-based discovery of a novel, noncovalent inhibitor of AmpC beta-lactamase. Structure (Camb) 2002; 10: 1013-23.
37. Doman TN, McGovern SL, Witherbee BJ, Kasten TP, Kurumbail R, Stallings WC, et al. Molecular docking and high-throughput screening for novel inhibitors of protein tyrosine phosphatase-1B. J Med Chem 2002; 45: 2213-21.
38. Pieper U, Eswar N, Stuart AC, Ilyin VA, Sali A. MODBASE, a database of annotated comparative protein structure models. Nucleic Acids Res 2002; 30: 255-9.
39. Diller DJ, Li R. Kinases, homology models, and high throughput docking. J Med Chem 2003; 46: 4638-47.
40. Composer, www.tripos.com.
41. MOE, www.chemcomp.com.
42. Modeler, www.accelrys.com.
43. GeneMine, www.bioinformatics.ucla.edu/genemine/.
44. Chen YZ, Zhi DG. Ligand-protein inverse docking and its potential use in the computer search of protein targets of a small molecule. Proteins 2001; 43: 217-26.
45. Schafferhans A, Klebe G. Docking ligands onto binding site representations derived from proteins built by homology modelling. J Mol Biol 2001; 307: 407-27.
46. SETIηome, www.setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu.
47. Vangrevelinghe E, Zimmermann K, Schoepfer J, Portmann R, Fabbro D, Furet P. Discovery of a potent and selective protein kinase CK2 inhibitor by high-throughput docking. J Med Chem 2003; 46: 2656-62.
48. Accelrys Inc. San Diego, CA, USA.
49. Diller DJ, Merz KM, Jr. High throughput docking for library design and library prioritization. Proteins 2001; 43: 113-24.
50. Honma T, Hayashi K, Aoyama T, Hashimoto N, Machida T, Fukasawa K, et al. Structure-based generation of a new class of potent Cdk4 inhibitors: new de novo design strategy and library design. J Med Chem 2001; 44: 4615-27.
51. Nishibata Y, Itai A. Confirmation of usefulness of a structure construction program based on three-dimensional receptor structure for rational lead generation. J Med Chem 1993; 36: 2921-8.
52. Schapira M, Raaka BM, Das S, Fan L, Totrov M, Zhou Z, et al. Discovery of diverse thyroid hormone receptor antagonists by high-throughput docking. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100: 7354-9.
53. Bissantz C, Bernard P, Hibert M, Rognan D. Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. II. Are homology models of G-Protein Coupled Receptors suitable targets? Proteins 2003; 50: 5-25.
54. Bursavich MG, Rich DH. Designing non-peptide peptidomimetics in the 21st century: inhibitors targeting conformational ensembles. J Med Chem 2002; 45: 541-58.
55. Leulliot N, Varani G. Current topics in RNA-protein recognition: control of specificity and biological function through induced fit and conformational capture. Biochemistry 2001; 40: 7947-56.
56. Davis AM, Teague SJ. Hydrogen bonding, hydrophobic interactions and failure of the rigid receptor hypothesis. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 1999; 38: 736-749.
57. Cummings MD, Hart TN, Read RJ. Monte Carlo docking with ubiquitin. Protein Sci 1995; 4: 885-99.
58. Najmanovich R, Kuttner J, Sobolev V, Edelman M. Side-chain flexibility in proteins upon ligand binding. Proteins 2000; 39: 261-8.
59. Carlson HA. Protein flexibility is an important component of structure-based drug discovery. Curr Pharm Des 2002; 8: 1571-8.
60. Carlson HA. Protein flexibility and drug design: how to hit a moving target. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2002; 6: 447-52.
61. Carlson HA, Masukawa KM, McCammon JA. Method for Including the Dynamic Fluctuations of a Protein in Computer-Aided Drug Design. J Phys Chem A 1999; 103: 10213-9.
62. Verkhivker GM, Bouzida D, Gehlhaar DK, Rejto PA, Freer ST, Rose PW. Complexity and simplicity of ligand-macromolecule interactions: the energy landscape perspective. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2002; 12: 197-203.
63. Koshland DE. Application of a theory of enzyme specificity to protein synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1958; 44: 98-104.
64. Jorgensen WL. Rusting of the lock and key model for protein-ligand binding. Science 1991; 254: 954-5.
65. Jiang F, Kim SH. "Soft docking": matching of molecular surface cubes. J Mol Biol 1991; 219: 79-102.
66. Schneidman-Duhovny D, Inbar Y, Polak V, Shatsky M, Halperin I, Benyamini H, et al. Taking geometry to its edge: fast unbound rigid (and hinge-bent) docking. Proteins 2003; 52: 107-12.
67. Li CH, Ma XH, Chen WZ, Wang CX. A protein-protein docking algorithm dependent on the type of complexes. Protein Eng 2003; 16: 265-9.
68. Li CH, Ma XH, Chen WZ, Wang CX. A soft docking algorithm for predicting the structure of antibody-antigen complexes. Proteins 2003; 52: 47-50.
69. Palma PN, Krippahl L, Wampler JE, Moura JJ. BiGGER: a new (soft) docking algorithm for predicting protein interactions. Proteins 2000; 39: 372-84.
70. Fernandez-Recio J, Totrov M, Abagyan R. Soft protein-protein docking in internal coordinates. Protein Sci 2002; 11: 280-91.
71. Morelli X, Czjzek M, Hatchikian CE, Bornet O, Fontecilla-Camps JC, Palma NP, et al. Structural model of the Fe-hydrogenase/cytochrome c553 complex combining transverse relaxation-optimized spectroscopy experiments and soft docking calculations. J Biol Chem 2000; 275: 23204-10.
72. Morelli X, Dolla A, Czjzek M, Palma PN, Blasco F, Krippahl L, et al. Heteronuclear NMR and soft docking: an experimental approach for a structural model of the cytochrome c553-ferredoxin complex. Biochemistry 2000; 39: 2530-7.
73. Morelli XJ, Palma PN, Guerlesquin F, Rigby AC. A novel approach for assessing macromolecular complexes combining soft-docking calculations with NMR data. Protein Sci 2001; 10: 2131-7.
74. Leach AR. Ligand docking to proteins with discrete side-chain flexibility. J Mol Biol 1994; 235: 345-56.
75. Schaffer L, Verkhivker GM. Predicting structural effects in HIV-1 protease mutant complexes with flexible ligand docking and protein side-chain optimization. Proteins 1998; 33: 295-310.
76. David L, Luo R, Gilson MK. Ligand-receptor docking with the Mining Minima optimizer. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2001; 15: 157-71.
77. Head MS, Given JA, Gilson MK. "Mining Minima": Direct computation of conformational free energy. J Phys Chem 1997; 101: 1609-18.
78. Kairys V, Gilson MK. Enhanced docking with the mining minima optimizer: acceleration and side-chain flexibility. J Comput Chem 2002; 23: 1656-70.
79. Anderson AC, O'Neil RH, Surti TS, Stroud RM. Approaches to solving the rigid receptor problem by identifying a minimal set of flexible residues during ligand docking. Chem Biol 2001; 8: 445-57.
80. Nakajima N, Higo J, Kidera A, Nakamura H. Flexible docking of a ligand peptide to a receptor protein by multicanonical molecular dynamics simulation. Chem Phys Lett 1997; 278: 297-301.
81. Abseher R, Horstink L, Hilbers CW, Nilges M. Essential spaces defined by NMR structure ensembles and molecular dynamics simulation show significant overlap. Proteins 1998; 31: 370-82.
82. Philippopoulos M, Lim C. Exploring the dynamic information content of a protein NMR structure: comparison of a molecular dynamics simulation with the NMR and X-ray structures of Escherichia coli ribonuclease H1. Proteins 1999; 36: 87-110.
83. Knegtel RM, Kuntz ID, Oshiro CM. Molecular docking to ensembles of protein structures. J Mol Biol 1997; 266: 424-40.
84. Claussen H, Buning C, Rarey M, Lengauer T. FlexE: efficient molecular docking considering protein structure variations. J Mol Biol 2001; 308: 377-95.
85. Broughton HB. A method for including protein flexibility in protein-ligand docking: improving tools for database mining and virtual screening. J Mol Graph Model 2000; 18: 247-57, 302-4.
86. Jenwitheesuk E, Samudrala R. Improved prediction of HIV-I protease-inhibitor binding energies by molecular dynamics simulations. BMC Structural Biology 2003; 3: 1-9.
87. Kolossvary I, Guida WC. Low-mode conformational search elucidated: Application to C39H80 and flexible docking of 9-deazaguanine inhibitors into PNP. J Comput Chem 1999; 20: 1671-84.
88. Keseru GM, Kolossvary I. Fully flexible low-mode docking: application to induced fit in HIV integrase. J Am Chem Soc 2001; 123: 12708-9.
89. Davis ME, McCammon JA. Electrostatics in biomolecular structure and dynamics. Chem Rev 1990; 90: 509-21.
90. Massova I, Kollman PA. Computational alanine scanning to probe protein-protein interactions: A novel approach to evaluate binding free energies. J Am Chem Soc 1999; 121: 8133-43.
91. Kuhn B, Kollman PA. Binding of a diverse set of ligands to avidin and streptavidin: an accurate quantitative prediction of their relative affinities by a combination of molecular mechanics and continuum solvent models. J Med Chem 2000; 43: 3786-91.
92. Lin JH, Perryman AL, Schames JR, McCammon JA. Computational drug design accommodating receptor flexibility: the relaxed complex scheme. J Am Chem Soc 2002; 124: 5632-3.
93. Fernandez-Recio J, Totrov M, Abagyan R. ICM-DISCO docking by global energy optimization with fully flexible side-chains. Proteins 2003; 52: 113-7.
94. Lin JH, Perryman AL, Schames JR, McCammon JA. The relaxed complex method: Accommodating receptor flexibility for drug design with an improved scoring scheme. Biopolymers 2003; 68: 47-62.
95. Taylor RD, Jewsbury PJ, Essex JW. FDS: flexible ligand and receptor docking with a continuum solvent model and soft-core energy function. J Comput Chem 2003; 24: 1637-56.
96. Still WC, Tempezyk A, Hawley RC, Hendrickson T. Semianalytical treatment of solvation for molecular mechanics and dynamics. J Am Chem Soc 1990; 112: 6127-29.
97. Meng EC, Shoichet BK, Kuntz ID. Automated docking with grid-based energy evaluation. J Comput Chem 1992; 13: 505-24.
98. Leung D, Abbenante G, Fairlie DP. Protease Inhibitors: Current status and future prospects. J Med Chem 2000; 43: 305-41.
99. Holloway MK, Wai JM, Halgren TA, Fitzgerald PM, Vacca JP, Dorsey BD, et al. A priori prediction of activity for HIV-1 protease inhibitors employing energy minimization in the active site. J Med Chem 1995; 38: 305-17.
100. Kollman PA. Free energy calculations: Applications to chemical and biochemical phenomena. Chem Rev 1993; 93: 2395-417.
101. Sham YY, Chu ZT, Tao H, Warshel A. Examining methods for calculations of binding free energies: LRA, LIE, PDLD-LRA, and PDLD/S-LRA calculations of ligands binding to an HIV protease. Proteins 2000; 39: 393-407.
102. Cummings MD, Hart TN, Read RJ. Atomic solvation parameters in the analysis of protein-protein docking results. Protein Sci 1995; 4: 2087-99.
103. Zou X, Sun Y, Kuntz ID. Inclusion of Solvation in Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculations Using the Generalized-Born Model. J Am Chem Soc 1999; 121: 8033-43.
104. Luty BA, Wasserman ZR, Stouten PFW, Hodge CN, Zacharias M, McCammon JA. A Molecular Mechanics/Grid Method for Evaluation of Ligand-Receptor Interactions. J Comput Chem 1995; 16: 454-64.
105. Shoichet BK, Leach AR, Kuntz ID. Ligand solvation in molecular docking. Proteins 1999; 34: 4-16.
106. Gruneberg S, Stubbs MT, Klebe G. Successful virtual screening for novel inhibitors of human carbonic anhydrase: strategy and experimental confirmation. J Med Chem 2002; 45: 3588-602.
107. Van Drie JH. Pharmacophore discovery-lessons learned. Curr Phar Des 2003; 9: 1649-64.
108. Mustata GI, Briggs JM. A structure-based design approach for the identification of novel inhibitors: application to an alanine racemase. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2003; 16: 935-53.
109. Rastelli G, Pacchioni S, Sirawaraporn W, Sirawaraporn R, Parenti MD, Ferrari AM. Docking and database screening reveal new classes of Plasmodium falciparum dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors. J Med Chem 2003; 46: 2834-45.
110. Muegge I, Martin YC. A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. J Med Chem 1999; 42: 791-804.
111. Gehlhaar DK, Verkhivker GM, Rejto PA, Sherman CJ, Fogel DB, Fogel LJ, et al. Molecular recognition of the inhibitor AG-1343 by HIV-1 protease: conformationally flexible docking by evolutionary programming. Chem Biol 1995; 2: 317-24.
112. Eldridge MD, Murray CW, Auton TR, Paolini GV, Mee RP. Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1997; 11: 425-45.
113. Hart TN, Read RJ. A multiple-start Monte Carlo docking method. Proteins 1992; 13: 206-22.
114. Hart TN, Ness SR, Read RJ. Critical evaluation of the research docking program for the CASP2 challenge. Proteins 1997; Suppl 1: 205-9.
115. Gohlke H, Klebe G. Statistical potentials and scoring functions applied to protein-ligand binding. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2001; 11: 231-5.
116. Wang R, Lu Y, Wang S. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J Med Chem 2003; 46: 2287-303.
117. http://www.schrodinger.com/Products/glide.html
118. Jain AN. Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. J Med Chem 2003; 46: 499-511.
119. Stahl M, Rarey M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. J Med Chem 2001; 44: 1035-42.
120. Schulz-Gasch T, Stahl M. Binding site characteristics in structure-based virtual screening: evaluation of current docking tools. J Mol Model (Online) 2003; 9: 47-57.
121. 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: 4759-67.
122. Paul N, Rognan D. ConsDock: A new program for the consensus analysis of protein-ligand interactions. Proteins 2002; 47: 521-33.
123. Nissink JW, Murray C, Hartshorn M, Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Taylor R. A new test set for validating predictions of protein-ligand interaction. Proteins 2002; 49: 457-71.
124. FlexX validation set, http://www.biosolveit.de/software/
125. Meng EC, Gschwend DA, Blaney JM, Kuntz ID. Orientational sampling and rigid-body minimization in molecular docking. Proteins 1993; 17: 266-78.
126. Gschwend DA, Kuntz ID. Orientational sampling and rigid-body minimization in molecular docking revisited: on-the-fly optimization and degeneracy removal. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1996; 10: 123-32.
127. Verkhivker GM, Bouzida D, Gehlhaar DK, Rejto PA, Arthurs S, Colson AB, et al. Deciphering common failures in molecular docking of ligand-protein complexes. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2000; 14: 731-51.
128. Ewing TJ, Kuntz ID. Critical evaluation of search algorithms for automated molecular docking. J Comput Chem 1997; 18: 1175-89.
129. Demeunynck M, Bailly C, Wilson WD. Ed. DNA and RNA Binders, Weinheim, Germany, Wiley-VCH. 2002.
130. Carter AP, Clemons WM, Brodersen DE, Morgan-Warren RJ, Wimberly BT, Ramakrishnan V. Functional insights from the structure of the 30S ribosomal subunit and its interactions with antibiotics. Nature 2000; 407: 340-8.
131. Batey RT, Rambo RP, Lucast L, Rha B, Doudna JA. Crystal structure of the ribonucleoprotein core of the signal recognition particle. Science 2000; 287: 1232-9.
132. Chen Q, Shafer RH, Kuntz ID. Structure-based discovery of ligands targeted to the RNA double helix. Biochemistry 1997; 36: 11402-7.
133. Filikov AV, Mohan V, Vickers TA, Griffey RH, Cook PD, Abagyan RA, et al. Identification of ligands for RNA targets via structure-based virtual screening: HIV-1 TAR. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2000; 14: 593-610.
134. Du Z, Lind KE, James TL. Structure of TAR RNA complexed with a Tat-TAR interaction nanomolar inhibitor that was identified by computational screening. Chem Biol 2002; 9: 707-12.
135. Lind KE, Du Z, Fujinaga K, Peterlin BM, James TL. Structure-based computational database screening, in vitro assay, and NMR assessment of compounds that target TAR RNA. Chem Biol 2002; 9: 185-93.
136. Klebe G, Bohm HJ. Energetic and entropic factors determining binding affinity in protein-ligand complexes. J Recept Signal Transduct Res 1997; 17: 459-73.
137. Jiang S, Zhao Q, Debnath AK. Peptide and non-peptide HIV fusion inhibitors. Curr Pharm Design 2002; 8(8): 563-80.
138. Pag U, Sahl HG. Multiple activities in lantibiotics - models for the design of novel antibiotics? Curr Pharm Design 2002; 8(9): 815-33.
139. Schlitzer M. Structure based design of benzophenone-based non-thiol farnesyltransferase inhibitors. Curr Pharm Design 2002; 8(19): 1713-22.