The use of consensus scoring in ligand-based virtual screening

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 277-288

  Baber, J Christian ^a   Shirley, William A ^a   Gao, Yinghong ^a   Feher, Miklos ^a  

^a NEUROCRINE BIOSCIENCES INC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DRUG PRODUCTS; FUNCTIONS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SAMPLING; VIRTUAL REALITY;

LOGISTIC REGRESSION; PHARMACOPHO; SINGLE SCORING FUNCTIONS; VIRTUAL SCREENING;

SCREENING;

EID: 33344465112     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci050296y     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (51)

1. Jorgensen, W. L. The many roles of computation in drug discovery. Science 2004, 303, 1813-1818.
2. Green, D. V. Virtual screening of virtual libraries. Prog. Med. Chem. 2003, 41, 61-97.
3. Lyne, P. D. Structure-based virtual screening: an overview. Drug Discovery Today 2002, 20, 1047-1055.
4. Stahura, F. L.; Bajorath, J. Virtual Screening Methods that Complement HTS. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen 2004, 259-269.
5. Langer, T.; Hoffmann, R. D. Virtual screening: an effective tool for lead structure discovery? Curr. Pharm. Des. 2001, 509-27.
6. Charifson, P. S.; Corkery, J. J.; Murcko, M. A.; Walters, W. P. Consensus scoring: A method for obtaining improved hit rates from docking databases of three-dimensional structures into proteins. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 5100-5109.
7. Paul, N.; Rognan, D. ConsDock: A New Program for the Consensus Analysis of Protein-Ligand Interactions. Proteins 2002, 47, 521-533.
8. Clark, R. D.; Strizev, A.; Leonard, J. M.; Blake, J. F.; Matthew, J. B. Consensus scoring for ligand/protein interactions. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2002, 20, 281-295.
9. Gohlke, H.; Klebe, G. Statistical Potentials and scoring functions applied to protein-ligand binding. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2001, 11, 231-235.
10. Ginn, C. M. R.; Willett, P.; Bradshaw, J. Combination of molecular similarity measures using data fusion. Perspect. Drug Discovery Des. 2000, 20, 1-16.
11. Salim, N.; Holliday, J.; Willett, P. Combination of Fingerprint-Based Similarity Coefficients Using Data Fusion. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 435-442.
12. Godden, J. W.; Furr, J. R.; Xue, L.; Stahura, F. L.; Bajorath, J. Molecular similarity analysis and virtual screening by mapping of consensus positions in binary-transformed chemical descriptor spaces with variable dimensionality. J, Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 21-29.
13. Baurin, N.; Mozziconacci, J. C.; Arnoult, E.; Chavatte, P.; Marot, C.; Morin-Allory, L. 2D QSAR consensus prediction for high-throughput virtual screening. An application to COX-2 inhibition modeling and screening of the NCI database. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 276-285.
14. Raymond, J. W.; Jalaie, M; Bradley, M. P. Conditional probability: a new fusion method for merging disparate virtual screening results. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 601-9.
15. Shen, M.; Béguin, C.; Golbraikh, A.; Stables, J. P.; Kohn, H.; Tropsha, A. Application of predictive QSAR models to database mining: identification and experimental validation of novel anticonvulsant compounds. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 2356-2364.
16. Dearden, J. C. In silico prediction of drug toxicity. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17, 119-127.
17. Mattioni, B. E.; Kauffman, G. W.; Jurs, P. C.; Custer, L. L.; Durham, S. K.; Pearl, G. M. Predicting the genotoxicity of secondary and aromatic amines using data subsetting to generate a model ensemble. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 949-963.
18. Wang, R.; Wang, S. How Does Consensus Scoring Work for Virtual Library Screening? An Idealized Computer Experiment. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1422-1426.
19. Kitchen, D. B.; Decernez, H.; Furr, J. R.; Bajorath, J. Docking and Scoring in Virtual Screening for Drug Discovery: Methods and Applications. Nature Rev. Drug Discovery 2004, 3, 935-948.
20. MOE (Molecular Operating Environment) version 2004.03; Chemical Computing Group Inc.: 1010 Sherbrooke St. West, Suite 910, Montreal, Quebec H3A 2R7, Canada.
21. McGregor, M. J.; Pallai, P. V. Clustering of large databases of compounds: Using MDL Keys as structural descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1997, 37, 443-448.
22. Xue, L.; Godden, J. W.; Stahura, F. L.; Bajorath, J. Design and evaluation of a molecular fingerprint involving the transformation of property descriptor values into a binary classification scheme. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 1151-1157.
23. Pearlman, R. S.; Smith, K. M. Metric Validation and the Receptor-Relevant Subspace Concept. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1999, 39, 28-35.
24. Pearlman, R. S.; Smith, K. M. Novel Software Tools for Chemical Diversity. Perspect. Drug Discovery Des. 1998, 9/10/11, 339-353.
25. DiverseSolutions, version 6.2; Optive Research, Inc., 12331-A Riata Trace Parkway, Suite 110, Austin, TX 78727, U.S.A.
26. Catalyst, version 9.1; Accelrys Inc., 9685 Scranton Road, San Diego, CA 92121, U.S.A.
27. CombiCode is a suite of program and libraries in Python provided in an interface known as Pyxie. It is available from Deltagen Research Laboratories.
28. Li, H.; Sutter, J.; Hoffmann, R. HypoGen: An Automated System for Generating 3D Predictive Pharmacophore Models. In Pharmacophore Perception, Development and Use in Drug Design; International University Line: La Jolla, CA, 2000.
29. Smellie, A.; Stanton, R.; Henne, R.; Teig; S. Conformational Analysis by Intersection: Conan. J. Comput. Chem. 2003, 24, 10-20.
30. Bush, B. L.; Sheridan, R. P. PATTY: a programmable atom typer and language for automatic classification of atoms in molecular databases. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1993, 33, 756-762.
31. Greene, J. W.; Kahn, S.; Sprague, P.; Savoj, H.; Teig, S. L. Chemical function queries for 3D Database search. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34, 1297-1308.
32. Barnum, D.; Greene, J. W.; Smellie, A.; Sprague, P. Identification of common functional configurations among'molecules. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1996, 36, 563-571.
33. Penzotti, J.; Lamb, M. L.; Evensen, E.; Grootenhuis, P. D. J. A computational ensemble pharmacophore model for identifying substrates of P-Glycoprotein. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 1737-1740.
34. Lanctot, J. K.; Putta, S.; Lemmen, C.; Greene, J. W. Using ensembles to classify compounds for drug discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 2163-2169.
35. Srinivasan, J.; Castellino, A.; Bradley, E. K.; Eksterowicz, J. E.; Grootenuis, P. D. J.; Putta, S.; Stanton, R. V. Evaluation of a novel shape based computational filter for lead evolution: Application to Thrombin inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 2494-2500.
36. Halgren, T. A.; Murphy, R. B.; Friesner, R. A.; Beard, H. S.; Frye, L. L.; Pollard, W. T.; Banks, J. L. Glide: A New Approach for Rapid, Accurate Docking and Scoring. 2. Enrichment Factors in Database Screening. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 1750-1759.
37. Verdonk, M. L.; Berdini, V.; Hartshorn, M. J.; Mooij, W. T.; Murray, C. W.; Taylor, R. D.; Watson, P. Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 793-806.
38. Pearlman, D. A.; Charifson, P. S. Improved Scoring of Ligand-Protein Interactions Using OWFEG Energy Grids. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 502-511.
39. Zweig, M. H.; Campbell, G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin. Chem. 1993, 39, 561-577.
40. Tabachnick, B. G.; Fidell, L. S. Using multivariate statistics, 4th ed.; Allyn & Bacon: Boston, MA, 2000; ISBN: 0321056779.
41. Livingstone, D. Data analysis for chemists; Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1995.
42. NAG Fortran Library, Routine G02BNF, Numerical Algorithm Group Ltd., Oxford, U.K.
43. NAG Statistical Add-Ins for Excel, Numerical Algorithm Group Ltd., Oxford, U.K.
44. Norman, G. R.; Streiner, D. L. Biostatistics: The bare essentials, 2nd ed.; Dekker Inc.: Hamilton, 2000.
45. Brown, R. D.; Martin, Y. C. The Information Content of 2D and 3D Structural Descriptors Relevant to Ligand-Receptor Binding. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1997, 37, 1-9.
46. Brown, R. D.; Martin, Y. C. Use of Structure-Activity Data To Compare Structure-Based Clustering Methods and Descriptors for Use in Compound Selection. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1996, 36, 572-584.
47. Bender, A.; Mussa, H. Y.; Glen, R. C.; Railing, S. Molecular Similarity Searching Using Atomic Environments, Information-Based Feature Selection and a Naïve Bayesian Classifier. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 170-178.
48. Durant, J. L.; Leland, B. A.; Henry, D. R.; Nourse, J. G. Reoptimization of MDL Keys for Use in Drug Discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 1273-1280.
49. To be published.
50. Xing, L.; Hodgkin, E.; Liu, Q.; Sedlock, D. Evaluation and application of multiple scoring functions for a virtual screening experiment. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2004, 18, 333-344.
51. NAG Fortran Library, Routine G08DAF, Numerical Algorithm Group Ltd., Oxford, U.K.