Pocket v.2: Further developments on receptor-based pharmacophore modeling

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 46, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 2684-2691

  Chen, Jing ^a   Lai, Luhua ^a,b  

^a PEKING UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b PEKING UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFORMATIONS; DRUG PRODUCTS; ENZYMES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; PROTEINS;

HYDROXYSTEROID DEHYDROGENASE; KINASE; PHARMACOPHORES; RECEPTORS;

PHARMACOKINETICS;

3 (OR 17) BETA HYDROXYSTEROID DEHYDROGENASE; 3 (OR 17)-BETA-HYDROXYSTEROID DEHYDROGENASE; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; HYDROXYSTEROID DEHYDROGENASE; LIGAND; PHOSPHOLIPASE A;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONFORMATION; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG INDUSTRY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

17-HYDROXYSTEROID DEHYDROGENASES; ALGORITHMS; CHEMISTRY, PHARMACEUTICAL; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; CYCLIN-DEPENDENT KINASE 2; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG INDUSTRY; HUMANS; LIGANDS; MOLECULAR CONFORMATION; PHOSPHOLIPASES A; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; RECEPTORS, ESTROGEN; SOFTWARE;

EID: 33845727607     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci600246s     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Gund, P. Three-dimensional Pharmacophoric Pattern Searching. Prog. Mol. Subcell. Biol. 1977, 5, 117-143.
2. Güner, O. F. Pharmacophore Perception, Development, and Use in Drug Design; UIL Biotechnology Series: La Jolla, CA, 2000.
3. Güner, O. F. History and evolution of the pharmacophore model concept in computer-aided drug design. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2002, 2, 1321-1332.
4. Dror, O.; Shulman-Peleg, A.; Nussinov R.; Wolfson, H. J. Predicting Molecular Interactions in silico: 1. A Guide to Pharmacophore Identification and its Applications to Drug Design. Curr. Med. Chem. 2004, 11, 71-90.
5. Martin, Y. C.; Bures, M. G.; Danaher, E. A.; DeLazzer, J.; Lico, I.; Pavlik, P. A. A fast new approach to pharmacophore model mapping and its application to dopaminergic and benzodiazepine agonists. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1993, 7, 83-102.
6. Barnum, D.; Greene, J.; Smellie, A.; Sprague, P. Identification of common functional configurations among molecules. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1996, 36, 563-571.
7. Greene, J.; Kahn, S.; Savoj, H.; Sprague, P.; Teig, S. Chemical Function Queries for 3D Database Search. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34, 1297-1308.
8. Smellie, A.; Teig, S. L.; Towbin, P. Poling: Promoting conformational variation. J. Comput. Chem. 1995, 16, 171-187.
9. Jones, G.; Willett, P.; Glen, R. C. A genetic algorithm for flexible molecular overlay and pharmacophore model elucidation. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1995, 9, 532-549.
10. John H. V. D. Pharmacophore discovery -Lessons learned. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2003, 9, 1649-1664.
11. Patel, Y.; Gillet, V. J.; Bravi, G.; Leach, A. R. A comparison of the pharmacophore model identification programs: Catalyst, DISCO and GASP. J. Comput. -Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16, 653-681.
12. Berman, H. M.; Henrick, K.; Nakamura H. Announcing the worldwide Protein Data Bank. Nat. Struct. Biol. 2003, 12, 980-985.
13. Goodford, P. J. A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. J. Med. Chem. 1985, 28, 849-857.
14. Boobbyer, D. N.; Goodford, P. J.; McWhinnie, P. M.; Wade, R. C. New hydrogen-bond potentials for use in determining energetically favorable binding sites on molecules of known structure. J. Med. Chem. 1989, 32, 1083-1094.
15. Schmitt, S.; Kuhn, D.; Klebe, G. A new method to detect related function among proteins independent of sequence and fold homology. J. Mol Biol. 2002, 323, 387-406.
16. Mariusz M.; SaǍndor S.; Krzysztof A. O. Common Structural Cliques: a tool for protein structure and function analysis. Protein Eng. 2003, 16, 543-552.
17. Bohm, H. J. The computer program LUDI: a new method for the de novo design of enzyme inhibitors. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1992, 6, 61-78.
18. Bohm, H. J. LUDI: rule-based automatic design of new substituents for enzyme inhibitor leads. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1992, 6, 593-606.
19. Clark, D. E.; Frenkel, D. F.; Levy, S. A.; Li, J.; Murray C. W.; Robson, B.; Waszkowycz, B.; Westhead, D. R. PRO_LIGAND: An approach to de novo molecular design. 1. Application to the design of organic moleculars. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1995, 9, 13-32.
20. Clark, D. E.; Westhead, D. R.; Sykes, R. A.; Murray, C. W. Activesite-directed 3D database searching: Pharmacophore extraction and validation of hits. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1996, 10, 397-416.
21. Hoffren, A. M.; Murray, C. M.; Hoffmann, R. D. Structure-based focusing using pharmacophore models derived from the active site of 17beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2001, 7, 547-566.
22. Kirchhoff, P. D.; Brown, R.; Kahn, S.; Waldman, M.; Venkatachalam, C. M. Application of Structure-Based Focusing to the Estrogen Receptor. J. Comput. Chem. 2001, 22, 993-1003.
23. Wang, R. X.; Gao, Y.; Lai, L. H. LigBuilder: a multi-purpose program for structure-based drug design. J. Mol. Model. 2000, 6, 498-516.
24. Wang, R. X.; Liu, L.; Lai, L. H.; Tang, Y. Q. Score: A New Empirical Method for Estimating the Binding Affinity of a Protein -Ligand Complex. J. Mol. Model. 1998, 4, 379-394.
25. Stahl, M.; Rarey, M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 1035-1042.
26. Wang, R. X.; Lu, Y. P.; Wang, S. M. Comparative Evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 2287-2303.
27. Tao, P.; Lai, L. H. Protein ligand docking based on empirical method for binding affinity estimation. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 5, 429-446.
28. Hendlich, M. Databases for Protein-Ligand Complexes. Acta Crystallogr. 1998, 54, 1178-1182.
29. Wang, R.; Fang, X.; Lu, Y.; Yang, C.-Y.; Wang, S. The PDBbind Database: Methodologies and updates. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 4111-4119.
30. Wang, R.; Fang, X.; Lu, Y.; Wang, S. The PDBbind Database: Collection of Binding Affinities for Protein-Ligand Complexes with Known Three-Dimensional Structures. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 2977-2980.
31. Teague, S. J. Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2003, 2, 527-541.
32. Erickson, J. A.; Jalaie, M.; Robertson, D. H.; Lewis, R. A.; Vieth, M. Lessons in molecular recognition: the effects of ligand and protein flexibility on molecular docking accuracy. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 45-55.
33. Carlson, H. A. Protein flexibility is an important component of structure-based drug discovery. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2002, 8, 1571-1578.
34. Rauh, D.; Klebe, G.; Stubbs, M. T. Understanding protein-ligand interactions: the price of protein flexibility. J. Mol. Biol. 2004, 335, 1325-1341.
35. Carlson, H. A.; McCammon, J. A. Accommodating protein flexibility in computational drug design. Mol. Pharmacol. 2000, 57, 213-218.
36. Carlson, H. A. Protein flexibility and drug design: how to hit a moving target. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2002, 6, 447-452.
37. Wong, C. F.; McCammon, J. A. Protein flexibility and computeraided drug design. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2003, 43, 31-45.
38. Meng E. C.; Shoichet B. K.; Kuntz I. D. Automated docking with grid-based energy evaluation. J. Comput. Chem. 1992, 13, 505-524.
39. Shoichet B. K.; Bodian D. L.; Kuntz I. D. Molecular docking using shape descriptors. J. Comput. Chem. 1992, 13, 380-397.
40. Shoichet B. K.; Kuntz I. D. Matching chemistry and shape in molecular docking. Protein Eng. 1993, 6, 723-732.
41. Lam, P. Y.; Jadhav, P. K.; Eyermann, C. J.; Hodge, C. N.; Ru, Y.; Bacheler, L. T.; Meek, J. L.; Otto, M. J.; Rayner, M. M.; Wong, Y. N. Rational design of potent, bioavailable, nonpeptide cyclic ureas as HIV protease inhibitors. Science 1994, 263, 380-384.
42. Wallace, A. C.; Laskowski, R. A.; Thornton J. M. LIGPLOT: A program to generate schematic diagrams of protein-ligand interactions. Protein Eng. 1995, 8, 127-134.