Improved lead-finding for kinase targets using high-throughput docking

Current Opinion in Drug Discovery and Development

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 339-347

  McInnes, Campbell ^a  

^a CYCLACEL LTD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

High throughput docking; Protein kinase; Virtual screening

Indexed keywords

BRINASE; CHECKPOINT KINASE 1; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE 2; INOSINATE DEHYDROGENASE; LIGAND; MITOGEN ACTIVATED PROTEIN KINASE P38; PROTEIN KINASE; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITOR; THYMIDINE KINASE INHIBITOR;

ALGORITHM; BINDING AFFINITY; BINDING SITE; COMPUTER MODEL; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG STRUCTURE; DRUG TARGETING; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; LIGAND BINDING; PHARMACOPHORE; PROTEIN DATA BANK; PROTEIN TARGETING; REVIEW;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRUG DESIGN; HUMANS; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITORS; PROTEIN KINASES; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 33646838453     PISSN: 13676733     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. McInnes C, Fischer PM: Strategies for the design of potent and selective kinase inhibitors. Curr Pharm Design (2005) 11(14):1845-1863. Describes the development of kinase inhibitors as therapeutics and the strategies used for drug design.
2. Abagyan R, Totrov M: High-throughput docking for lead generation. Curr Opin Chem Biol (2001) 5(4):375-382.
3. Kitchen DB, Decomez H, Furr JR, Bajorath J: Docking and scoring In virtual screening for drug discovery: Methods and applications. Nat Rev Drug Discov (2004) 3(11):935-949. Provides a comprehensive review of HTD theory, methodology and practices.
4. 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(4):409-443. Provides an extensive review of the basis and application of HTD methods.
5. 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(3):727-748.
6. Ewing TJ, Makino S, Skillman AG, Kuntz ID: Dock 4.0: Search strategies for automated molecular docking of flexible molecule databases. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2001) 15(5):411-428.
7. 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(7):1750-1759.
8. Friesner RA, Banks JL, Murphy RB, Halgren TA, Klicic JJ, Mainz DT, Repasky MP, Knoll EH, Shelley M, Perry JK, Shaw DE et al: Glide: A new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J Med Chem (2004) 47(7):1739-1749.
9. Kramer B, Rarey M, Lengauer T: Evaluation of the FlexX incremental construction algorithm for protein-ligand docking. Proteins (1999) 37(2):228-241.
10. McGann MR, Almond HR, Nicholls A, Grant JA, Brown FK: Gaussian docking functions. Biopolymers (2003) 68(1):76-90.
11. Venkatachalam CM, Jiang X, Oldfield T, Waldman M: LigandFit: A novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites. J Mol Graph Model (2003) 21(4):289-307.
12. Wu SY, McNae I, Kontopidis G, McClue SJ, McInnes C, Stewart KJ, Wang S, Zheleva DI, Marriage H, Lane DP, Taylor P et al: Discovery of a novel family of CDK inhibitors with the program LIDAEUS: Structural basis for ligand-induced disordering of the activation loop. Structure (2003) 11(4):399-410.
13. Miller MD, Kearsley SK, Underwood DJ, Sheridan RP: FLOG: A system to select 'quasi-flexible' ligands complementary to a receptor of known three-dimensional structure. J Comput Aided Mol Des (1994) 8(2):153-174.
14. Buzko OV, Bishop AC, Shokat KM: Modified AutoDock for accurate docking of protein kinase inhibitors. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2002) 16(2):113-127.
15. Cavasotto CN, Abagyan RA: Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases. J Mol Biol (2004) 337(1):209-225.
16. Jain AN: Surflex: Fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. J Med Chem (2003) 46(4):499-511.
17. Zavodszky MI, Kuhn LA: Side-chain flexibility in protein-ligand binding: The minimal rotation hypothesis. Protein Sci (2005) 14(4):1104-1114.
18. Warren GL, Andrews CW, Capelli AM, Clarke B, LaLonde J, Lambert MH, Lindvall M, Nevins N, Semus SF, Senger S, Tedesco G et al: A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. J Med Chem (2005): doi: 10.1021/jm050362n. Provides a thorough assessment of a wide variety of HTD programs and scoring functions.
19. Perola E, Walters WP, Charifson PS: A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance. Proteins (2004) 56(2):235-249. Provides an assessment of three commonly used HTD methods and their suitability for docking ligands into differing types of binding pocket.
20. Roche O, Kiyama R, Brooks CL 3rd: Ligand-protein database: Linking protein-ligand complex structures to binding data. J Med Chem (2001) 44(22):3592-3598.
21. 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(4):457-471.
22. Kellenberger E, Rodrigo J, Muller P, Rognan D: Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy. Proteins (2004) 57(2):225-242. Provides a rigorous comparison of docking and scoring tools and their relative performance on different target classes.
23. Krammer A, Kirchhoff PD, Jiang X, Venkatachalam CM, Waldman M: LigScore: A novel scoring function for predicting binding affinities. J Mol Graph Model (2005) 23(5):395-407.
24. 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(5):425-445.
25. Wang R, Lu Y, Wang S: Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J Med Chem (2003) 46(12):2287-2303. Provides a thorough, unbiased comparison of HTD scoring functions across a large number of protein targets.
26. 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(20):3786-3791.
27. Foloppe N, Fisher LM, Howes R, Kierstan P, Potter A, Robertson AG, Surgenor AE: Structure-based design of novel CHK1 inhibitors: Insights into hydrogen bonding and protein-ligand affinity. J Med Chem (2005) 48(13):4332-4345.
28. Hindle SA, Rarey M, Buning C, Lengaue T: Flexible docking under pharmacophore type constraints. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2002) 16(2):129-149.
29. Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Hartshorn MJ, Murray CW, Taylor RD: Improved protein-ligand clocking using GOLD. Proteins (2003) 52(4):609-623.
30. Lyne PD, Kenny PW, Cosgrove DA, Deng C, Zabludoff S, Wendoloski JJ, Ashwell S: Identification of compounds with nanomolar binding affinity for checkpoint kinase-1 using knowledge-based virtual screening. J Med Chem (2004) 47(8):1962-1968. An excellent case study demonstrating the successful application of HTD for the discovery of kinase inhibitors.
31. Deng Z, Chuaqui C, Singh J: Structural interaction fingerprint (SIFt): A novel method for analyzing three-dimensional protein-ligand binding interactions. J Med Chem (2004) 47(2):337-344. Describes a novel method lor evaluating the output from HTD studies and potentially for improving the accuracy of pose predictions based on known inhibitor binding modes.
32. Kroemer RT, Vulpetti A, McDonald JJ, Rohrer DC, Trosset JY, Giordanetto F, Cotesta S, McMartin C, Kihlen M, Stouten PF: Assessment of docking poses: Interactions-based accuracy classification (IBAC) versus crystal structure deviations. J Chem Inf Comput Sci (2004) 44(3):871-881. An important conclusion of this paper is that the RMSD of docked pose relative to the native liganded structure does not always indicate an accurate docking result.
33. Thomas MP, McInnes C, Fischer PM: Protein structures in virtual screening: A case study with CDK2. J Med Chem (2006) 49(1):92-104. Describes a detailed study of the impact of receptor flexibility on the success of HTD methods of reproducing known kinase inhibitor binding modes.
34. Barril X, Morley SD: Unveiling the full potential of flexible receptor docking using multiple crystallographic structures. J Med Chem (2005) 48(13):4432-4443.
35. Sherman W, Day T, Jacobson MP, Friesner RA, Farid R: Novel procedure for modeling ligand/receptor Induced fit effects. J Med Chem (2006) 49(2):534-553. Describes a new procedure for accounting for changes in receptor binding sites, resulting in dramatic improvements in the accuracy of pose prediction.