Alternative to consensus scoring - A new approach toward the qualitative combination of docking algorithms

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 1036-1044

  Wolf, Antje ^a   Zimmermann, Marc ^a   Hofmann Apitius, Martin ^a  

^a FRAUNHOFER INSTITUTE FOR ALGORITHMS AND SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING SCAI   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATABASE SYSTEMS; LIGANDS; PROBLEM SOLVING; PROTEINS;

DOCKING PERFORMANCE; GAMMA-CHYMOTRYPSIN; INTERPRETABILITY;

ALGORITHMS;

EID: 34250829729     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci6004965     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Kitchen, D. B.; Decernez, H.; Furr, J. R.; Bajorath, J. Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2004, 3, 935-949.
2. Berman, H. M.; Westbrook, J.; Feng, Z.; Gilliland, G.; Bhat, T. N.; Weissig, H.; Shindyalov, I. N.; Bourne, P. E. The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000, 28, 235-242.
3. Shoichet, B. K. Virtual screening of chemical libraries. Nature 2004, 432, 862-865.
4. Abagyan, R.; Totrov, M. High-throughput docking for lead generation. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2001, 5, 375-382.
5. Kuntz, I. D.; Blaney, J. M.; Oatley, S. J.; Lange, R.; Ferrin, T. E. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 1982, 161, 269-288.
6. Taylor, R. D.; Jewsbury, P. J.; Essex, J. W. A review of proteinsmall molecule docking methods. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16, 151-166.
7. 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 Evaluation Studies.
8. 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.
9. Verdonk, M. L.; Berdini, V.; Hartshorn, M. J.; Mooij, W. T. M.; Murray, C. W.; Taylor, R. D.; Watson, P. Virtual Screening Using Protein-Ligand Docking: Avoiding Artificial Enrichment. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2004, 44, 793-806.
10. Cole, J. C.; Murray, C. W.; Nissink, J. W. M.; Taylor, R. D.; Taylor, R. Comparing protein-ligand docking programs is difficult. Proteins 2005, 60, 325-332.
11. Leach, A. R.; Shoichet, B. K,; Peishoff, C. E. Prediction of Protein-Ligand Interactions. Docking and Scoring: Successes and Gaps. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 5851-5855.
12. 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, 409-443.
13. 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.
14. Wang, R.; Lu, Y.; Wang, S. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 2287-2303.
15. Warren, G.; Andrews, C.; Capelli, A.-M.; Clarke, B.; LaLonde, J.; Lambert, M.; Lindvall, M.; Nevins, N.; Semus, S.; Senger, S.; Tedesco, G.; Wall, I.; Woolven, J.; Peishoff, C.; Head, M. A Critical Assessment of Docking Programs and Scoring Functions. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 5912-5931.
16. 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.
17. Feher, M. Consensus scoring for protein-ligand interactions. Drug Discovery Today 2006, 11, 421-428.
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. 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.
20. Morris, G. M.; Goodsell, D. S.; Huey, R.; Hart, W. E.; Halliday, R. S.; Belew, R. K.; Olson, A. J. Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. J. Comput. Chem. 1998, 19, 1639-1662.
21. Sousa, S. F.; Fernandas, P. A.; Ramos, M. J. Protein-ligand docking: Current status and future challenges. Proteins 2006, 65, 15-26.
22. Weiner, S. J.; Kollman, P. A.; Nguyen, D. T.; Case, D. A. An all atom force field for simulations of proteins and nucleic acids. J. Comput. Chem. 1986, 7, 230-252.
23. Kramer, B.; Rarey, M.; Lengauer, T. Evaluation of the FLEXX incremental construction algorithm for protein-ligand docking. Proteins 1999, 37, 228-241.
24. Jones, G.; Willett, P.; Glen, R. C.; Leach, A. R.; Taylor, R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J. Mol. Biol. 1997, 267, 727-748.
25. Jacq, N.; Salzemann, J.; Legré, Y.; Reichstadt, M.; Jacq, F.; Zimmermann, M.; Maass, A.; Sridhar, M.; Kasam, V. K.; Schwichtenberg, H.; Hofmann, M.; Breton, V. Demonstration of In Silico docking at a large scale on grid infrastructure. In Challenges and Opportunities of HealthGrids; Hernández, V., Blanquer, I., Solomonides, T., Breton, V., Legré, Y., Eds.; Proceedings of HealthGrid, Valencia, Spain 2006.
26. WISDOM - Wide In Silico Docking On Malaria. http://scai.fraunhofer.de/ WISDOM.html (accessed Jan 3, 2007).
27. FlexX-200 data set. http://www.biosolveit.de/FlexX/dataset.html (accessed Jan 3, 2007).
28. BioSolvelT. http://www.biosolveit.de (accessed Jan 3, 2007).
29. ADT/AutoDockTools. http://autodock.scripps.edu/resources/adt (accessed Jan 3, 2007).
30. Rarey, M. FlexX. User Guide, Release 2; 2005.
31. Bursulaya, B. D.; Totrov, M.; Abagyan, R.; Brooks, C. L. r. Comparative study of several algorithms for flexible ligand docking. J. Comput. -Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17, 755-763.
32. Rarey, M.; Kramer, B.; Lengauer, T. Multiple automatic base selection: protein-ligand docking based on incremental construction without manual intervention. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 369-384.
33. Morris, G. M.; Goodsell, D. S.; Halliday, R. S.; Huey, R.; Hart, W. E.; Belew, R. K.; Olson, A. J. AutoDock - Automated Docking of Flexible Ligands to Receptors. User's Guide, Version 3.0.5; 2001.
34. Laaksonen, L. A graphics program for the analysis and display of molecular dynamics trajectories. J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 1992, 10, 33-34.
35. Bergman, D. L.; Laaksonen, L.; Laaksonen, A. Visualization of solvation structures in liquid mixtures. J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 1997, 15, 301-306.
36. CSC - Finnish IT center for science, http://www.csc.fi/english (accessed Jan 3, 2007).
37. Tel Developer Site, http://www.tcl.tk (accessed Jan 3, 2007).
38. Chen, H.; Lyne, P. D.; Giordanetto, F.; Lovell, T.; Li, J. On evaluating molecular-docking methods for pose prediction and enrichment factors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 401-415.