Computer-aided drug discovery and development (CADDD): In silico-chemico-biological approach

Chemico-Biological Interactions

Volumn 171, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 165-176

  Kapetanovic, I M ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Computational modeling; Drug development; Drug discovery; In silico drug design; Molecular modeling; Predictive toxicology; QSAR QSPR; Virtual screening

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; ANTIDEPRESSANT AGENT; CHECKPOINT 1 KINASE INHIBITOR; DOPAMINE 3 RECEPTOR STIMULATING AGENT; ENZYME INHIBITOR; ESTRADIOL; GENISTEIN; HTS 466284; INTEGRIN ALPHAV BETA3 RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST; LY 364947; PLANT EXTRACT; PRINABEREL; PROTEIN INHIBITOR; PROTEIN MDM2 P53 INHIBITOR; RESVERATROL; SEROTONIN 1 AGONIST; TRANSFORMING GROWTH FACTOR BETA RECEPTOR 1 KINASE INHIBITOR; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER MODEL; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG INDUSTRY; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; LIGAND BINDING; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MEDICINAL PLANT; NONHUMAN; PHARMACOPHORE; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DRUG DESIGN; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 38549117345     PISSN: 00092797     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2006.12.006     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Pozzan A. Molecular descriptors and methods for ligand based virtual high throughput screening in drug discovery. Curr. Pharm. Des. 12 17 (2006) 2099-2110
2. Green D.V. Virtual screening of virtual libraries. Prog. Med. Chem. 41 (2003) 61-97
3. PriceWaterhouseCoopers, PriceWaterhouseCoopers Pharma 2005: An Industrial Revolution in R&D. http://www.pwc.com/gx/eng/about/ind/pharma/industrial_revolution.pdf, 2005.
4. J.F. Contrera, Application of toxicology databases in drug development (estimating potential toxicity). http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/cinf/220nm/slides/220nm18/220nm18.ppt#285,24 ,Slide, 2004.
5. Shankar R., Frapaise X., and Brown B. LEAN drug development in R&D. Drug Discov. Dev. (2006) 57-60
6. Van de Waterbeemd H., and Gifford E. ADMET in silico modelling: towards prediction paradise?. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2 3 (2003) 192-204
7. Kumar N., Hendriks B.S., Janes K.A., De Graaf D., and Lauffenburger D.A. Applying computational modeling to drug discovery and development. Drug Discov. Today 11 17-18 (2006) 806-811
8. Hann M.M., and Oprea T.I. Pursuing the lead likeness concept in pharmaceutical research. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 8 3 (2004) 255-263
9. Oprea T.I., and Matter H. Integrating virtual screening in lead discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 8 4 (2004) 349-358
10. Roche O., and Guba W. Computational chemistry as an integral component of lead generation. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 5 7 (2005) 677-683
11. Ekins S., and Wang B. Computer Applications in Pharmaceutical Research and Development (2006), Wiley-Interscience
12. Chin D.N., Chuaqui C.E., and Singh J. Integration of virtual screening into the drug discovery process. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 4 10 (2004) 1053-1065
13. Jain A.N. Virtual screening in lead discovery and optimization. Curr. Opin. Drug. Discov. Dev. 7 4 (2004) 396-403
14. Stoermer M.J. Current status of virtual screening as analysed by target class. Med. Chem. 2 1 (2006) 89-112
15. Stahl M., Guba W., and Kansy M. Integrating molecular design resources within modern drug discovery research: the Roche experience. Drug Discov. Today 11 7-8 (2006) 326-333
16. Dror O., Shulman-Peleg A., Nussinov R., and Wolfson H.J. Predicting molecular interactions in silico. I. A guide to pharmacophore identification and its applications to drug design. Curr. Med. Chem. 11 1 (2004) 71-90
17. Schneidman-Duhovny D., Nussinov R., and Wolfson H.J. Predicting molecular interactions in silico. II. Protein-protein and protein-drug docking. Curr. Med. Chem. 11 1 (2004) 91-107
18. Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., Cimino M.C., Benz R.D., and Contrera J.F. An analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data. II. Identification of genotoxicants, reprotoxicants, and carcinogens using in silico methods. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 44 2 (2006) 97-110
19. Pandit D., So S.S., and Sun H. Enhancing specificity and sensitivity of pharmacophore-based virtual screening by incorporating chemical and shape features-a case study of HIV protease inhibitors. J. Chem. Inf. Model 46 3 (2006) 1236-1244
20. Toba S., Srinivasan J., Maynard A.J., and Sutter J. Using pharmacophore models to gain insight into structural binding and virtual screening: an application study with CDK2 and human DHFR. J. Chem. Inf. Model 46 2 (2006) 728-735
21. Funk O.F., Kettmann V., Drimal J., and Langer T. Chemical function based pharmacophore generation of endothelin-A selective receptor antagonists. J. Med. Chem. 47 11 (2004) 2750-2760
22. Krovat E.M., and Langer T. Non-peptide angiotensin II receptor antagonists: chemical feature based pharmacophore identification. J. Med. Chem. 46 5 (2003) 716-726
23. Collini M.D., Kaufman D.H., Manas E.S., Harris H.A., Henderson R.A., Xu Z.B., Unwalla R.J., and Miller C.P. 7-Substituted 2-phenyl-benzofurans as ER beta selective ligands. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 14 19 (2004) 4925-4929
24. Edsall Jr. R.J., Harris H.A., Manas E.S., and Mewshaw R.E. ERbeta ligands. Part 1. The discovery of ERbeta selective ligands which embrace the 4-hydroxy-biphenyl template. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 11 16 (2003) 3457-3474
25. Malamas M.S., Manas E.S., McDevitt R.E., Gunawan I., Xu Z.B., Collini M.D., Miller C.P., Dinh T., Henderson R.A., Keith Jr. J.C., and Harris H.A. Design and synthesis of aryl diphenolic azoles as potent and selective estrogen receptor-beta ligands. J. Med. Chem. 47 21 (2004) 5021-5040
26. Miller C.P., Collini M.D., and Harris H.A. Constrained phytoestrogens and analogues as ERbeta selective ligands. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 13 14 (2003) 2399-2403
27. Yang C., Edsall Jr. R., Harris H.A., Zhang X., Manas E.S., and Mewshaw R.E. ERbeta ligands. Part 2. Synthesis and structure-activity relationships of a series of 4-hydroxy-biphenyl-carbaldehyde oxime derivatives. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 12 10 (2004) 2553-2570
28. Kitchen D.B., Decornez H., Furr J.R., and Bajorath J. Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3 11 (2004) 935-949
29. Cummings M.D., DesJarlais R.L., Gibbs A.C., Mohan V., and Jaeger E.P. Comparison of automated docking programs as virtual screening tools. J. Med. Chem. 48 4 (2005) 962-976
30. Kellenberger E., Rodrigo J., Muller P., and Rognan D. Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy. Proteins 57 2 (2004) 225-242
31. Mohan V., Gibbs A.C., Cummings M.D., Jaeger E.P., and DesJarlais R.L. Docking: successes and challenges. Curr. Pharm. Des. 11 3 (2005) 323-333
32. Perola E., Walters W.P., and Charifson P.S. A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance. Proteins 56 2 (2004) 235-249
33. Warren G.L., Andrews C.W., Capelli A.M., Clarke B., LaLonde J., Lambert M.H., Lindvall M., Nevins N., Semus S.F., Senger S., Tedesco G., Wall I.D., Woolven J.M., Peishoff C.E., and Head M.S. A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. J. Med. Chem. 49 20 (2006) 5912-5931
34. Congreve M., Murray C.W., and Blundell T.L. Structural biology and drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 10 13 (2005) 895-907
35. Jorgensen W.L. The many roles of computation in drug discovery. Science 303 5665 (2004) 1813-1818
36. Kubinyi H. Success stories of computer-aided design. In: Ekins S., and Wang B. (Eds). Computer Applications in Pharmaceutical Research and Development (2006), Wiley-Interscience 377-424
37. Alvarez J., and Shoichet B. Virtual Screening in Drug Discovery (2005), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
38. Hou T., and Xu X. Recent development and application of virtual screening in drug discovery: an overview. Curr. Pharm. Des. 10 9 (2004) 1011-1033
39. G. Keri, L. Orfi, D. Eros, B. Hegymegi-Barakonyi, C. Szantai-Kis, Z. Horvath, F. Waczek, J. Marosfalvi, I. Szabadkai, J. Pato, Z. Greff, D. Hafenbradl, H. Daub, G. Muller, B. Klebl, U. A, Signal transduction therapy with rationally designed kinase inhibitors, Curr. Signal Trans. Ther. 1 (2006) 67-95.
40. Shoichet B.K. Virtual screening of chemical libraries. Nature 432 7019 (2004) 862-865
41. Boehm H.J., Boehringer M., Bur D., Gmuender H., Huber W., Klaus W., Kostrewa D., Kuehne H., Luebbers T., Meunier-Keller N., and Mueller F. Novel inhibitors of DNA Gyrase: 3D structure based biased needle screening, hit validation by biophysical methods, and 3D guided optimization. A promising alternative to random screening. J. Med. Chem. 43 14 (2000) 2664-2674
42. Doman T.N., McGovern S.L., Witherbee B.J., Kasten T.P., Kurumbail R., Stallings W.C., Connolly D.T., Shoichet B.K., and Molecular Docking. High-throughput screening for novel inhibitors of protein tyrosine phosphatase-1B. J. Med. Chem. 45 11 (2002) 2213-2221
43. Paiva A.M., Vanderwall D.E., Blanchard J.S., Kozarich J.W., Williamson J.M., and Kelly T.M. Inhibitors of dihydrodipicolinate reductase, a key enzyme of the diaminopimelate pathway of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1545 1-2 (2001) 67-77
44. Meagher K.L., Lerner M.G., and Carlson H.A. Refining the multiple protein structure pharmacophore method: consistency across three independent HIV-1 protease models. J. Med. Chem. 49 12 (2006) 3478-3484
45. Triballeau N., Acher F., Brabet I., Pin J.P., and Bertrand H.O. Virtual screening workflow development guided by the "receiver operating characteristic" curve approach. Application to high-throughput docking on metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 4. J. Med. Chem. 48 7 (2005) 2534-2547
46. Singh J., Chuaqui C.E., Boriack-Sjodin P.A., Lee W.C., Pontz T., Corbley M.J., Cheung H.K., Arduini R.M., Mead J.N., Newman M.N., Papadatos J.L., Bowes S., Josiah S., and Ling L.E. Successful shape-based virtual screening: the discovery of a potent inhibitor of the type I TGFbeta receptor kinase (TbetaRI). Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 13 24 (2003) 4355-4359
47. Sawyer J.S., Anderson B.D., Beight D.W., Campbell R.M., Jones M.L., Herron D.K., Lampe J.W., McCowan J.R., McMillen W.T., Mort N., Parsons S., Smith E.C., Vieth M., Weir L.C., Yan L., Zhang F., and Yingling J.M. Synthesis and activity of new aryl- and heteroaryl-substituted pyrazole inhibitors of the transforming growth factor-beta type I receptor kinase domain. J. Med. Chem. 46 19 (2003) 3953-3956
48. 1A agonist (PRX-00023) for the treatment of anxiety and depression. J. Med. Chem. 49 11 (2006) 3116-3135
49. Steindl T.M., Crump C.E., Hayden F.G., and Langer T. Pharmacophore modeling, docking, and principal component analysis based clustering: combined computer-assisted approaches to identify new inhibitors of the human rhinovirus coat protein. J. Med. Chem. 48 20 (2005) 6250-6260
50. Lipinski C., and Hopkins A. Navigating chemical space for biology and medicine. Nature 432 7019 (2004) 855-861
51. Lu Y., Nikolovska-Coleska Z., Fang X., Gao W., Shangary S., Qiu S., Qin D., and Wang S. Discovery of a nanomolar inhibitor of the human murine double minute 2 (MDM2)-p53 interaction through an integrated, virtual database screening strategy. J. Med. Chem. 49 13 (2006) 3759-3762
52. Lyne P.D., Kenny P.W., Cosgrove D.A., Deng C., Zabludoff S., Wendoloski J.J., and Ashwell S. Identification of compounds with nanomolar binding affinity for checkpoint kinase-1 using knowledge-based virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 47 8 (2004) 1962-1968
53. Langer T., and Krovat E.M. Chemical feature-based pharmacophores and virtual library screening for discovery of new leads. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Dev. 6 3 (2003) 370-376
54. Lloyd D.G., Golfis G., Knox A.J.S., Fayne D., Meegan M.J., and Oprea T.I. Oncology exploration: charting cancer medicinal chemistry space. Drug Discov. Today 11 3-4 (2006) 149-159
55. Lu I.L., Huang C.F., Peng Y.H., Lin Y.T., Hsieh H.P., Chen C.T., Lien T.W., Lee H.J., Mahindroo N., Prakash E., Yueh A., Chen H.Y., Goparaju C.M.V., Chen X., Liao C.C., Chao Y.S., Hsu J.T.A., and Wu S.Y. Structure-based drug design of a novel family of PPARγ partial agonists: virtual screening, X-ray crystallography, and in vitro/in vivo biological activities. J. Med. Chem. 49 9 (2006) 2703-2712
56. Varady J., Wu X., Fang X., Min J., Hu Z., Levant B., and Wang S. Molecular modeling of the three-dimensional structure of dopamine 3 (D3) subtype receptor: discovery of novel and potent D3 ligands through a hybrid pharmacophore- and structure-based database searching approach. J. Med. Chem. 46 21 (2003) 4377-4392
57. Olsen L., Jost S., Adolph H.-W., Pettersson I., Hemmingsen L., and Jorgensen F.S. New leads of metallo-[beta]-lactamase inhibitors from structure-based pharmacophore design. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 14 8 (2006) 2627-2635
58. Manetti F., Locatelli G.A., Maga G., Schenone S., Modugno M., Forli S., Corelli F., and Botta M. A combination of docking/dynamics simulations and pharmacophoric modeling to discover new dual c-Src/Abl kinase inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 49 11 (2006) 3278-3286
59. 3 antagonists as novel anticancer agents. J. Med. Chem. 49 15 (2006) 4526-4534
60. Rollinger J.J.M., Mocka P.P., Zidorn C.C., Ellmerer E.E.P., Langer T.T., and Stuppner H.H. Application of the in combo screening approach for the discovery of non-alkaloid acetylcholinesterase inhibitors from Cichorium intybus. Curr. Drug Discov. Technol. 2 3 (2005) 185-193
61. Rollinger J.M. Strategies for efficient lead structure discovery from natural products. Curr. Med. Chem. 13 13 (2006) 1491-1507
62. Rollinger J.M., Bodensieck A., Seger C., Ellmerer E.P., Bauer R., Langer T., and Stuppner H. Discovering COX-inhibiting constituents of Morus root bark: activity-guided versus computer-aided methods. Planta Med. 71 5 (2005) 399-405
63. Rollinger J.M., Haupt S., Stuppner H., and Langer T. Combining ethnopharmacology and virtual screening for lead structure discovery: COX-inhibitors as application example. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 2 (2004) 480-488
64. Rollinger J.M., Hornick A., Langer T., Stuppner H., and Prast H. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitory activity of scopolin and scopoletin discovered by virtual screening of natural products. J. Med. Chem. 47 25 (2004) 6248-6254
65. Klebe G. Virtual ligand screening: strategies, perspectives and limitations. Drug Discov. Today 11 13-14 (2006) 580-594
66. Perola E. Minimizing false positives in kinase virtual screens. Proteins 64 2 (2006) 422-435
67. Steuber H., Zentgraf M., Gerlach C., Sotriffer C.A., Heine A., and Klebe G. Expect the unexpected or caveat for drug designers: multiple structure determinations using aldose reductase crystals treated under varying soaking and co-crystallisation conditions. J. Mol. Biol. 363 1 (2006) 174-187
68. Leach A.R., Shoichet B.K., and Peishoff C.E. Prediction of protein-ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: successes and gaps. J. Med. Chem. 49 20 (2006) 5851-5855
69. Richards W.G. Virtual screening using grid computing: the screensaver project. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 1 7 (2002) 551-555
70. Kola I., and Landis J. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates?. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3 8 (2004) 711-715
71. Simon-Hettich B., Rothfuss A., and Steger-Hartmann T. Use of computer-assisted prediction of toxic effects of chemical substances. Toxicology 224 1-2 (2006) 156-162
72. Crum Brown A., and Frazer T. On the connection between chemical constitution and physiological action. Part I. On the physiological action of the salts of the ammonia bases derived from Strycnia, Brucia, Thebaia, Codeia, Morphia, and Nicotinia. Trans. R. Soc. Edinburgh 25 (1868) 151-203
73. Hansch C., and Fujita T. Rho-sigma-pi analysis. A method for the correlation of biological activity and chemical structure. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 86 (1964) 1616-1626
74. Hansch C., and Steward A.R. The use of substituent constants in the analysis of the structure-activity relationship in penicillin derivatives. J. Med. Chem. 44 (1964) 691-694
75. Tunkel J., Mayo K., Austin C., Hickerson A., and Howard P. Practical considerations on the use of predictive models for regulatory purposes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39 7 (2005) 2188-2199
76. J.F. Contrera, E.J. Matthews, N.L. Kruhlak, R.D. Benz, Development and application of computational toxicology and informatics resources at the FDA CDER Office of Pharmaceutical Sciences. http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/04/slides/2004-4078S1_06_Contrera.pp t#468,10,Slide, 2004.
77. Contrera J.F., Maclaughlin P., Hall L.H., and Kier L.B. QSAR modeling of carcinogenic risk using discriminant analysis and topological molecular descriptors. Curr. Drug Discov. Technol. 2 2 (2005) 55-67
78. Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., Benz R.D., and Contrera J.F. Assessment of the health effects of chemicals in humans. I. QSAR estimation of the maximum recommended therapeutic dose (MRTD) and no effect level (NOEL) of organic chemicals based on clinical trial data. Curr. Drug Discov. Technol. 1 1 (2004) 61-76
79. Contrera J.F., Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., and Benz R.D. Estimating the safe starting dose in phase I clinical trials and no observed effect level based on QSAR modeling of the human maximum recommended daily dose. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 40 3 (2004) 185-206
80. Geldenhuys W.J., Gaasch K.E., Watson M., Allen D.D., and Van der Schyf C.J. Optimizing the use of open-source software applications in drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 11 3-4 (2006) 127-132
81. Baurin N., Aboul-Ela F., Barril X., Davis B., Drysdale M., Dymock B., Finch H., Fromont C., Richardson C., Simmonite H., and Hubbard R.E. Design and characterization of libraries of molecular fragments for use in NMR screening against protein targets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput Sci. 44 6 (2004) 2157-2166
82. Rees D.C., Congreve M., Murray C.W., and Carr R. Fragment-based lead discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3 8 (2004) 660-672
83. Schneider G., and Fechner U. Computer-based de novo design of drug-like molecules. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 4 8 (2005) 649-663
84. Rajasethupathy P., Vayttaden S.J., and Bhalla U.S. Systems modeling: a pathway to drug discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 9 4 (2005) 400-406
85. Butcher E.C. Can cell systems biology rescue drug discovery?. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 4 6 (2005) 461-467
86. Butcher E.C., Berg E.L., and Kunkel E.J. Systems biology in drug discovery. Nat. Biotechnol. 22 10 (2004) 1253-1259
87. Hood L., and Perlmutter R.M. The impact of systems approaches on biological problems in drug discovery. Nat. Biotechnol. 22 10 (2004) 1215-1217
88. Bugrim A., Nikolskaya T., and Nikolsky Y. Early prediction of drug metabolism and toxicity: systems biology approach and modeling. Drug Discov. Today 9 3 (2004) 127-135
89. Ekins S. Systems-ADME/Tox: resources and network approaches. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Meth. 53 1 (2006) 38-66
90. Michelson S. Assessing the impact of predictive biosimulation on drug discovery and development. J. Bioinf. Comput. Biol. 1 1 (2003) 169-177
91. Michelson S. The impact of systems biology and biosimulation on drug discovery and development. Mol. Biosyst. 2 6-7 (2006) 288-291
92. Davidov E., Holland J., Marple E., and Naylor S. Advancing drug discovery through systems biology. Drug Discov. Today 8 4 (2003) 175-183
93. Cho C.R., Labow M., Reinhardt M., Van Oostrum J., and Peitsch M.C. The application of systems biology to drug discovery. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 10 4 (2006) 294-302
94. Kubinyi H. Drug research: myths, hype and reality. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2 8 (2003) 665-668