Focused library design in GPCR projects on the example of 5-HT2c agonists: Comparison of structure-based virtual screening with ligand-based search methods

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 938-952

  Bissantz, Caterina ^a   Schalon, Claire ^a   Guba, Wolfgang ^a   Stahl, Martin ^a  

^a F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Docking; Drug design; GPCR; Scoring; Similarity search

Indexed keywords

CATECHOLAMINE DERIVATIVE; DOPAMINE 2 RECEPTOR; G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR; LIGAND; OPIATE RECEPTOR; RHODOPSIN; SEROTONIN 2C AGONIST; SEROTONIN 2C RECEPTOR; SEROTONIN DERIVATIVE;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; BINDING SITE; CATTLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; COMPLEX FORMATION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DATA BASE; DRUG DESIGN; HUMAN; HYDROGEN BOND; LIGAND BINDING; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; MOLECULAR MODEL; NONHUMAN; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; SEROTONINERGIC SYSTEM; SWISS-PROT;

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DRUG DESIGN; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR CONFORMATION; RECEPTORS, G-PROTEIN-COUPLED; SEROTONIN AGONISTS; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

BOS TAURUS;

EID: 28644447577     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.20651     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Marchese A, George SR, Kolakowski LF, Lynch KR, O'Dowd BF. Novel GPCR and their endogenous ligands: expanding the boundaries of physiology and pharmacology. Trends Pharmacol Sei 1999;20:370-375.
2. Wise A, Gearing K, Rees S. Target validation of G-protein coupled receptors. Drug Discov Today 2002;7:235-246.
3. Palczewski K, Kumasaka T, Hori T, et al. Crystal structure of rhodopsin: a G protein-coupled receptor. Science 2000;289:739-745.
4. Henderson R, Baldwin JM, Ceska TA, Zemlin F, Beckmann E, Downing KH. Model for the structure of bacteriorhodopsin based on high-resolution electron cryo-microscopy. J Mol Biol 1990;213:899-929.
5. Baldwin JM. The probable arrangement of the helices in G protein-coupled receptors. EMBO J 1993;12:1693-1703.
6. Baldwin JM, Schertler GF, linger VM. An alpha-carbon template for the transmembrane helices in the rhodopsin family of G-protein coupled receptors. J Mol Biol 1997;272:144-164.
7. Hibert MF, Trumpp-Kallmeyer S, Bruinvels A, Hoflack J. Three-dimensional models of neurotransmitter G-binding protein coupled receptors. Mol Pharmacol 1991;40:8-15.
8. Bikker JA, Trumpp-Kallmeyer S, Humblet C. G-protein coupled receptors: models, mutagenesis, and drug design. J Med Chem 1998;41:2911-2927.
9. Mouillac B, Chini B, Balestre MN, et al. The binding site of neuropeptide vasopressin Via receptor. Evidence for a major localization within transmembrane regions. J Biol Chem 1995;270:25771-25777.
10. 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.
11. Evers A, Klebe G. Ligand-supported homology modeling of G-protein-coupled receptor sites: models sufficient for successful virtual screening. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2004;43:248-251.
12. Daylight software manual. Mission Viejo, CA: Daylight Inc.
13. Rarey M, Dixon JS. Feature trees: a new molecular similarity measure based on tree matching. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1998;12(5):471-490.
14. http://www.sunsetmolecular.com. Santa Fe, NM: Sunset Molecular Discovery.
15. Butina D. Unsupervised data base clustering based on Daylight's fingerprint and tanimoto similarity: a fast and automated way to cluster small and large data sets. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1999;3:747-750.
16. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ. CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 1994;22:4673-4680.
17. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG. Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992;89:10915-10919.
18. MOE, Version 2005.05. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Chemical Computing Group.
19. Case DA, Pearlman DA, Caldwell JW, et al. AMBER 6.0. San Francisco: University of California; 1997.
20. Corina, Version 3.0. Erlangen, Germany: Molecular Networks GmbH Computerchemie.
21. 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.
22. Eldridge M, Murray CW, Auton TA, Paolini GV, Lee 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;11:425-445.
23. Stahl M, Rarey M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. J Med Chem 2001;44:1035-1042.
24. 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.
25. Schwartz TW. Locating ligand-buiding sites in 7 TM receptors by protein engineering. Curr Opin Biotechnol 1994;5:434-444.
26. Shi L, Javitch JA. The second extracellular loop of the dopamine D2 receptor lines the binding-site crevice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2004;101(2):440-445.
27. Shi L, Liapakis G, Xu R, Guarnieri F, Ballesteros JA, Javitch JA. Beta2 adrenergic receptor activation. J Biol Chem 2002;277(43):40989-40996.
28. Bissantz C, Folkers G, Rognan D. Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. I. Evaluation of different docking/scoring combinations. J Med Chem 2000;43:4759-4767.
29. Stahl M, Rarey M, Klebe G. In: Lengauer T, editor. Bioinformatics: from genomes and drugs. Weinheim: VCH; 2001. p 229.
30. Adams D, Benardeau A, Bickerdike MJ, et al. 5-HT2C receptor agonists for the treatment of obesity. Biological and chemical adventures. Chimia 2004;58:613-620.