Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 57, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 225-242

  Kellenberger, Esther ^a   Rodrigo, Jordi ^a   Muller, Pascal ^a   Rognan, Didier ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

Docking; Drug design; PDB; Scoring; Virtual screening

Indexed keywords

ENZYME INHIBITOR; LIGAND; PROTEIN; THYMIDINE KINASE INHIBITOR;

ACCURACY; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BINDING AFFINITY; BINDING SITE; CALCULATION; COMPLEX FORMATION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COMPUTER SYSTEM; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; EVALUATION; LIGAND BINDING; MACROMOLECULE; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; NONHUMAN; PARAMETER; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN DATABASE; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SCREENING; STEREOCHEMISTRY; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; TECHNIQUE; X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

COMPUTER GRAPHICS; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; DRUG DESIGN; HERPESVIRUS 1, HUMAN; LIBRARIES, DIGITAL; LIGANDS; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, QUATERNARY; SOFTWARE; THYMIDINE KINASE; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; VIRAL PROTEINS;

RUMEX;

EID: 4544367743     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.20149     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Brooijmans N, Kuntz ID. Molecular recognition and docking algorithms. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2003;32:335-373.
2. Kuntz ID, Blaney JM, Oatley SJ, Langridge R, Ferrin TE. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol 1982;161:269-288.
3. 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.
4. Taylor RD, Jewsbury PJ, Essex JW. A review of protein-small molecule docking methods. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002;16:151-166.
5. Gehlhaar DK, Verkhivker GM, Rejio PA, Sherman CJ, Fogel DB, Fogel LJ, Freer ST. Molecular recognition of the inhibitor AG-1343 by HIV-1 protease: conformationally flexible docking by evolutionary programming. Chem Biol 1995;2:317-324.
6. Welch W, Ruppert J, Jain AN. Hammerhead: fast, fully automated docking of flexible ligands to protein binding sites. Chem Biol 1996;3:449-462.
7. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC, Leach AR, Taylor R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J Mol Biol 1997;267:727-748.
8. McMartin C, Bohacek RS. QXP: powerful, rapid computer algorithms for structure-based drug design. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1997;11:333-344.
9. Totrov M, Abagyan R. Flexible protein-ligand docking by global energy optimization in internal coordinates. Proteins 1997;1:215-220.
10. Baxter CA, Murray CW, Clark DE, Westhead DR, Eldridge MD. Flexible docking using Tabu search and an empirical estimate of binding affinity. Proteins 1998;33:367-382.
11. Morris G, Goodsell D, Halliday R, Huey R, Hart W, Belew R, Olson AJ. Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. J Comput Chem 1998;19:1639-1662.
12. Kramer B, Rarey M, Lengauer T. Evaluation of the FLEXX incremental construction algorithm for protein-ligand docking. Proteins 1999;37:228-241.
13. David L, Luo R, Gilson MK. Ligand-receptor docking with the Mining Minima optimizer. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2001;15:157-171.
14. Diller DJ, Merz KM Jr. High throughput docking for library design and library prioritization. Proteins 2001;43:113-124.
15. 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;15:411-428.
16. Pang YP, Perola E, Xu K, Prendergast FG. EUDOC: a computer program for identification of drug interaction sites in macromolecules and drug leads from chemical databases. J Comput Chem 2001;22:1750-1771.
17. Jackson RM. Q-fit: a probabilistic method for docking molecular fragments by sampling low energy conformational space. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002;16:43-57.
18. Paul N, Rognan D. ConsDock: A new program for the consensus analysis of protein-ligand interactions. Proteins 2002;47:521-533.
19. Zavodszky MI, Sanschagrin PC, Korde RS, Kuhn LA. Distilling the essential features of a protein surface for improving protein-ligand docking, scoring, and virtual screening. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002;16:883-902.
20. Jain AN. Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. J Med Chem 2003;46: 499-511.
21. McGann MR, Almond HR, Nicholls A, Grant JA, Brown FK. Gaussian docking functions. Biopolymers 2003;68:76-90;
22. Taylor RD, Jewsbury PJ, Essex JW. FDS: flexible ligand and receptor docking with a continuum solvent model and soft-core energy function. J Comput Chem. 2003;24:1637-1656.
23. 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: 289-307.
24. Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Hartshorn MJ, Murray CW, Taylor RD. Improved protein-ligand docking using GOLD. Proteins 2003;52: 609-623.
25. Muegge I, Martin YC, Hajduk PJ, Fesik SW. Evaluation of PMF scoring in docking weak ligands to the FK506 binding protein. J Med Chem 1999;42:2498-2503.
26. 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.
27. Gohlke H, Hendlich M, Klebe G. Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol 2000;295: 337-356.
28. Pearlman DA, Charifson PS. Are free energy calculations useful in practice?: a comparison with rapid scoring functions for the p38 MAP kinase protein system. J Med Chem 2001;44: 3417-3423.
29. Stahl M, Rarey M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. J Med Chem 2001;44:1035-1042.
30. Terp GE, Johansen BN, Christensen IT, Jorgensen FS. A new concept for multidimensional selection of ligand conformations (MultiSelect) and multidimensional scoring (MultiScore) of protein-ligand binding affinities. J Med Chem 2001;44:2333-2343.
31. Buzko OV, Bishop AC, Shokat KM. Modified AutoDock for accurate docking of protein kinase inhibitors. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002;16:113-127.
32. Clark RD, Strizhev A, Leonard JM, Blake JF, Matthew JB. Consensus scoring for ligand/protein interactions. J Mol Graph Model 2002;20:281-295.
33. Gohlke H, Klebe G. Approaches to the description and prediction of the binding affinity of small-molecule ligands to macromolecular receptors. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2002;41:2644-2676.
34. Wang R, Lu Y, Wang S. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J Med Chem 2003;46:2287-2303.
35. Charifson PS, Corkery JJ, Murcko MA, Walters WP. 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.
36. Keseru GM. A virtual high throughput screen for high affinity cytochrome P450cam substrates: implications for in silico prediction of drug metabolism. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2001;15:649-657.
37. Doman TN, McGovern SL, Witherbee BJ, Kasten TP, Kurumbail R, Stallings WC, Connolly DT, Shoichet BK. Molecular docking and high-throughput screening for novel inhibitors of protein tyrosine phosphatase-1B. J Med Chem 2002;45:2213-2221.
38. Nissink JWM, Murray C, Hartshorn M, Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Taylor R. A new test set for validating predictions of protein-ligand interaction. Proteins 2002;49:457-471.
39. 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.
40. Berman HM, Battistuz T, Bhat TN, Bluhm WF, Bourne PE, Burkhardt K, Feng Z, Gilliland GL, Iype L, Jain S, Fagan P, Marvin J, Padilla D, Ravichandran V, Schneider B, Thanki N, Weissig H, Westbrook JD, Zardecki C. The Protein Data Bank. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 2002;58:899-907.
41. 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; 11:425-445.
42. 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.
43. Schnecke V, Swanson CA, Getzoff ED, Tainer JA, Kuhn LA. Screening a peptidyl database for potential ligands to proteins with side-chain flexibility. Proteins 1998;33:74-87.
44. Ruppert J, Welch W, Jain AN. Automatic identification and representation of protein binding sites for molecular docking. Protein Sci 1997;6:524-533.
45. Muegge I. Selection criteria for drug-like compounds. Med Res Rev 2003;23:302-321.
46. Laskowski RA. SURFNET: a program for visualizing molecular surfaces, cavities, and intermolecular interactions. J Mol Graph 1995;13:323-330.
47. Bostrom J, Greenwood JR, Gottfries J. Assessing the performance of OMEGA with respect to retrieving bioactive conformations. J Mol Graph Model 2003;21:449-462.
48. Wurth C, Kessler U, Vogt J, Schulz GE, Folkers G, Scapozza L. The effect of substrate binding on the conformation and structural stability of Herpes simplex virus type 1 thymidine kinase. Protein Sci 2001;10:63-73.
49. Pickett SD, Sherborne BS, Wilkinson T, Bennett J, Borkakoti N, Broadhurst M, Hurst D, Kilford I, McKinnell M, Jones PS. Discovery of novel low molecular weight inhibitors of IMPDH via virtual needle screening. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2003;13:1691-1694.
50. Wyss PC, Gerber P, Hartman PG, Hubschwerlen C, Locher H, Marty HP, Stahl M. Novel dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors: structure-based versus diversity-based library design and high-throughput synthesis and screening. J Med Chem 2003;46:2304-2312.