Comparing protein-ligand docking programs is difficult

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 60, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 325-332

  Cole, Jason C ^a   Murray, Christopher W ^b   Nissink, J Willem M ^a   Taylor, Richard D ^b   Taylor, Robin ^a  

^a CAMBRIDGE CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC DATA CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^b ASTEX PHARMACEUTICALS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Affinity prediction; Drug design; Enrichment rates; Protein ligand binding; Virtual screening

Indexed keywords

BENZYLAMINE DERIVATIVE; BILIVERDIN; LIGAND; METHOTREXATE; PROTEIN; TRYPSIN;

ALGORITHM; BIOINFORMATICS; COMPLEX FORMATION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; DATA BASE; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; GEOMETRY; LIGAND BINDING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN LIGAND DOCKING; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VIRTUAL REALITY;

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; BINDING SITES; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CRYSTALLIZATION; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEINS; PROTEOMICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SOFTWARE;

EID: 23044513878     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.20497     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Taylor RD, Jewsbury PJ, Essex JW. A review of protein-small molecule docking methods. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002;16:151-166.
2. Morris GM, Goodsell DS, Halliday RS, Huey R, Hart WE, Belew RK, Olson AJ. Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. J Comp Chem 1998;19:1639-1662.
3. Makino S, Kuntz ID. Automated flexible ligand docking method and its application for database search. J Comput Chem 1997;18: 1812-1825.
4. Rarey M, Kramer B, Lengauer T, Klebe G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J Mol Biol 1996;261:470-489.
5. OpenEye Scientific Software, Sante Fe, New Mexico, USA.
6. Friesner RA, Banks JL, Murphy RB, Halgren TA, Klicic JJ, Mainz DT, Repasky MP, Knoll EH, Shelley M, Perry JK, and others. Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J Med Chem 2004;47: 1739-1749.
7. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC, Leach AR, Taylor R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J Mol Biol 1997;267:727-748.
8. Abagyan RA, Totrov MM, Kuznetsov DA. ICM: a new method for structure modeling and design: applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation. J Comp Chem 1994;15:488-506.
9. McMartin C, Bohacek RS. QXP: powerful, rapid computer algorithms for structure-based drug design. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1997;11:333-344.
10. Kellenberger E, Rodrigo J, Muller P, Rognan D. Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy. Proteins 2004;57:225-242.
11. Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov IN, Bourne PE. The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res 2000;28:235-242.
12. Kontoyianni M, McClellan LM, Sokol GS. Evaluation of docking performance: comparative data on docking algorithms. J Med Chem 2003;47:558-565.
13. Kramer B, Rarey M, Lengauer T. Evaluation of the FlexX incremental construction algorithm for protein-ligand docking. Proteins 1999;37:228-241.
14. Gohlke G, Hendlich M, Klebe G. Knowledge-based scoring functions to predict protein-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol 2000;295: 337-356.
15. Vieth M, Hirst JD, Kolinski A, Brooks III CL. Assessing energy functions for flexible docking. J Comp Chem 1998;19:1612-1622.
16. Bursulaya BD, Totrov M, Abagyan R, Brooks III CL. Comparative study of several algorithms for flexible ligand docking. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2003;17:755-763.
17. Nissink JWM, Murray C, Hartshorn M, Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Taylor R. A new test set for validating predictions of protein-ligand interaction. Proteins 2002;49:457-471.
18. Goto J, Kataoka R, Hirayama N. Ph4Dock: pharmacophore-based protein-ligand docking. J Med Chem 2004;47:6804-6811.
19. Kroemer RT, Vulpetti A, McDonald JJ, Rohrer DC, Trosset J-Y, Giordanetto F, Cotesta S, McMartin C, Kihlen M, Stouten PFW. Assessment of docking poses: interaction-based accuracy classification (IBAC) versus crystal-structure deviations. J Chem Inf Comp Sci 2004;44:871-881.
20. Pang Y-P, Perola E, Xu K, Prendergast FG. EUDOC: a computer program for identification of drug interaction sites in macromolecules and drug leads from chemical databases. J Comp Chem 2001;22:1750-1771.
21. Hartshorn MJ. AstexViewer: a visualization aid for structure-based drug design. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002;16:871-881.
22. CAPRI: Critical assessment of prediction of interactions. http://capri.ebi.ac.uk/
23. Abagyan RA, Totrov MM. Contact area difference (CAD): a robust measure to evaluate accuracy of protein models. J Mol Biol 1997;268:678-685.
24. Halgren TA, Murphy RB, Friesner RA, Beard HS, Frye LL, Pollard WT, Banks JL. Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening. J Med Chem 2004;47:1750-1759.
25. Triballeau N, Acher F, Bertrand H-O. A plea for a wider application of ROC curve analysis in drug design. Evaluation of virtual screening workflows applied to metabotropic glutamate receptor sub-type4. XVIIIth Int Symp Med Chem 2004, Copenhagen.
26. Bissantz C, Folkers G, Rognan D. Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. 1. Evaluation of different docking/scoring combinations. J Med Chem 2000;43:4759-4767.
27. Siegel S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. London: McGraw-Hill; 1956.
28. Verdonk ML, Berdini V, Hartshorn MJ, Mooij WTM, Murray CW, Taylor RD, Watson P. Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004;44:793-806.
29. Morley SD, Afshar M. Validation of an empirical RNA-ligand scoring function for fast flexible docking using RiboDock. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2004;18:189-208.
30. Krovat EM, Langer T. Impact of scoring functions on enrichment in docking-based virtual screening: an application study on renin inhibitors. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004;44:1123-1129.
31. Schulz-Gasch T, Stahl M. Binding site characteristics in structure-based virtual screening: evaluation of current docking tools. J Mol Model 2003;9:47-57.
32. Hu X, Balaz S, Shelver WH. A practical approach to docking of zinc metalloproteinase inhibitors. J Mol Graph Model 2004;22:293-307.
33. Perola E, Walters WP, Charifson PS. A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance. Proteins 2004;56:235-249.
34. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC. Molecular recognition of receptor sites using a genetic algorithm with a description of desolvation. J Mol Biol 1995;245:43-53.
35. Muryshev AE, Tarasov DN, Butygin AV, Butygina OYu, Aleksandrov AB, Nikitin SM. A novel scoring function for molecular docking. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2003;17:597-605.
36. Wang J, Kollman PA, Kuntz ID. Flexible ligand docking: a multistep strategy approach. Proteins 1999;36:1-19.
37. Eldridge MD, Murray CW, Auton TR, Paolini GV, Mee RP. Empirical scoring functions: 1. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1997;11:425-445.
38. Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Hartshorn MJ, Murray CW, Taylor RD. Improved protein-ligand docking using GOLD. Proteins 2003;52: 609-623.
39. Molecular Networks GmbH, Erlangen, Germany.
40. Allen FH. The Cambridge Structural Database: a quarter of a million crystal structures and rising. Acta Crystallogr B Biol Crystallogr 2002;58:380-388.
41. Erickson JA, Jalaie M, Robertson DH, Lewis RA, Vieth M. Lessons in molecular recognition: the effects of ligand and protein flexibility on molecular docking accuracy. J Med Chem 2004;47:45-55.
42. Murray CW, Baxter CA, Frenkel AD. The sensitivity of the results of molecular docking to induced fit effects: application to thrombin, thermolysin and neuraminidase. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1999;13:547-562.
43. Jenkins JL, Kao RYT, Shapiro R. Virtual screening to enrich hit lists from high-throughput screening: a case study on small-molecule inhibitors of angiogenin. Proteins 2003;50:81-93.
44. Lyne PD. Structure-based virtual screening: an overview. Drug Discov Today 2002;7:1047-1055.
45. Clark RD, Strizhev A, Leonard JM, Blake JF, Matthew JB. Consensus scoring for ligand/protein interactions. J Mol Graph Model 2002;20:281-295.
46. Wang R, Lu Y, Wang S. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J Med Chem 2003;46:2287-2303.
47. Ferrara P, Gohlke H, Price DJ, Klebe G, Brooks CL III. Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. J Med Chem 2004;47:3032-3047.