Virtual screening of the estrogen receptor

Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery

Volumn 3, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 853-866

  Knox, Andrew J S ^a   Yang, Yidong ^a   Lloyd, David G ^a   Meegan, Mary J ^a  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Antiestrogens; Docking; Estrogen receptor; Ligand based virtual screening pharmacophore; Quantitative structure activity relationship; Scoring; Selective estrogen receptor modulators; Structure based virtual screening; Virtual screening

Indexed keywords

4 HYDROXYTAMOXIFEN; ALEXA 633; ANTIESTROGEN; ASN 3780064; BIPHENYLDIOL; ENDOCRINE DISRUPTOR; ERI 5; ERI 7; ESTRADIOL; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR ALPHA; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR ALPHA BLOCKING AGENT; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR BETA; G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR; G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR 30; HORMONE RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; MS 1105; SELECTIVE ESTROGEN RECEPTOR MODULATOR; SP 00944;

ALGORITHM; BINDING AFFINITY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DRUG BIOAVAILABILITY; DRUG MECHANISM; DRUG POTENCY; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG SELECTIVITY; HUMAN; IC 50; LIPOPHILICITY; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR DOCKING; MOLECULAR LIBRARY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FUNCTION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; PROTEIN TARGETING; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RECEPTOR BINDING; REVIEW; SCREENING TEST; VALIDATION STUDY; VIRTUAL REALITY;

EID: 48749123464     PISSN: 17460441     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1517/17460441.3.8.853     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Knox AJ, Meegan MJ, Lloyd DG. Estrogen receptors: molecular interactions, virtual screening and future prospects. Curr Top Med Chem 2006;6(3):217-43
2. Meyers MJ, Sun J, Carlson KE, et al. Estrogen receptor subtype-selective ligands: asymmetric synthesis and biological evaluation of cis- and trans-5,11-dialkyl- 5,6,11, 12-tetrahydrochrysenes. J Med Chem 1999;42(13):2456-68
3. Stauffer SR, Coletta CJ, Tedesco R, et al. Pyrazole ligands: structure-affinity/activity relationships and estrogen receptor-alpha-selective agonists. J Med Chem 2000;43(26):4934-47
4. Stauffer SR, Huang Y, Coletta CJ, et al. Estrogen pyrazoles: defining the pyrazole core structure and the orientation of substituents in the ligand binding pocket of the estrogen receptor. Bioorg Med Chem 2001;9(1):141-50
5. Stauffer SR, Huang YR, Aron ZD, et al. Triarylpyrazoles with basic side chains: development of pyrazole-based estrogen receptor antagonists. Bioorg Med Chem 2001;9(1):151-61
6. Veber DF, Johnson SR, Cheng HY, et al. Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates. J Med Chem 2002;45(12):2615-23
7. Wenlock MC, Austin RP, Barton P, et al. A comparison of physiochemical property profiles of development and marketed oral drugs. J Med Chem 2003;46(7):1250-6
8. Leeson PD, Springthorpe B. The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2007;6(11):881-90
9. Knox AJ, Meegan MJ, Sobolev V, et al. Target specific virtual screening: optimization of an estrogen receptor screening platform. J Med Chem 2007;50(22):5301-10
10. Lloyd DG, Golfis G, Knox AJ, et al. Oncology exploration: charting cancer medicinal chemistry space. Drug Discov Today 2006;11(3-4):149-59
11. Bhal SK, Kassam K, Peirson IG, Pearl GM. The Rule of Five revisited: applying log D in place of log P in drug-likeness filters. Mol Pharm 2007;4(4):556-60
12. Knox AJ, Meegan MJ, Carta G, Lloyd DG. Considerations in compound database preparation - "hidden" impact on virtual screening results. J Chem Inf Model 2005;45(6):1908-19
13. Verdonk ML, Berdini V, Hartshorn MJ, et al. Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004;44(3):793-806
14. Godden JW, Bajorath J. A distance function for retrieval of active molecules from complex chemical space representations. J Chem Inf Model 2006;46(3):1094-7
15. Available from: http://www.eyesopen.com/about/events/cup7/hawkins/ Hawkins_UKqsar_06.ph.png
16. Huang N, Shoichet BK, Irwin JJ. Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. J Med Chem 2006;49(23):6789-801
17. Miteva MA, Lee WH, Montes MO, Villoutreix BO. Fast structure-based virtual ligand screening combining FRED, DOCK, and Surflex. J Med Chem 2005;48(19):6012-22
18. Montes M, Miteva MA, Villoutreix BO. Structure-based virtual ligand screening with LigandFit: pose prediction and enrichment of compound collections. Proteins 2007;68(3):712-25
19. Schulz-Gasch T, Stahl M. Binding site characteristics in structure-based virtual screening: evaluation of current docking tools. J Mol Model 2003;9(1):47-57
20. Jain AN. Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. J Med Chem 2003;46(4):499-511
21. Stahl M, Rarey M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. J Med Chem 2001;44(7):1035-42
22. Nettles KW, Bruning JB, Gil G, et al. Structural plasticity in the oestrogen receptor ligand-binding domain. EMBO Rep 2007;8(6):563-8
23. Sivanesan D, Rajnarayanan RV, Doherty J, Pattabiraman N. In-silico screening using flexible ligand binding pockets: a molecular dynamics-based approach. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2005;19(4):213-28
24. Yoon S, Welsh WJ. Identification of a minimal subset of receptor conformations for improved multiple conformation docking and two-step scoring. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004;44(1):88-96
25. Oostenbrink BC, Pitera JW, van Lipzig MM, et al. Simulations of the estrogen receptor ligand-binding domain: affinity of natural ligands and xenoestrogens. J Med Chem 2000;43(24):4594-605
26. Chen J, Lai L. Pocket v.2: further developments on receptor-based pharmacophore modeling. J Chem Inf Model 2006;46(6):2684-91
27. Jacobsson M, Karlen A. Ligand bias of scoring functions in structure-based virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model 2006;46(3):1334-43
28. Carta G, Knox AJ, Lloyd DG. Unbiasing scoring functions: a new normalization and rescoring strategy. J Chem Inf Model 2007;47(4):1564-71
29. Yang JM, Shen TW. A pharmacophore-based evolutionary approach for screening selective estrogen receptor modulators. Proteins 2005;59(2):205-20
30. Mpamhanga CP, Chen B, McLay IM, Willett P. Knowledge-based interaction fingerprint scoring: a simple method for improving the effectiveness of fast scoring functions. J Chem Inf Model 2006;46(2):686-98
31. Amari S, Aizawa M, Zhang J, et al. VISCANA: visualized cluster analysis of protein-ligand interaction based on the ab initio fragment molecular orbital method for virtual ligand screening. J Chem Inf Model 2006;46(1):221-30
32. Yang JM, Chen YF, Shen TW, et al. Consensus scoring criteria for improving enrichment in virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model 2005;45(4):1134-46
33. Salaniwal S, Manas ES, Alvarez JC, Unwalla RJ. Critical evaluation of methods to incorporate entropy loss upon binding in high-throughput docking. Proteins 2007;66(2):422-35
34. Huang SY, Zou X. An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: II. Validation of the scoring function. J Comput Chem 2006;27(15):1876-82
35. Stjernschantz E, Marelius J, Medina C, et al. Are automated molecular dynamics simulations and binding free energy calculations realistic tools in lead optimization? An evaluation of the linear interaction energy (LIE) method. J Chem Inf Model 2006;46(5):1972-83
36. Fischer B, Fukuzawa K, Wenzel W. Receptor-specific scoring functions derived from quantum chemical models improve affinity estimates for in silico drug discovery. Proteins 2008;70(4):1264-73
37. Sippl W. Receptor-based 3D QSAR analysis of estrogen receptor ligands - merging the accuracy of receptor-based alignments with the computational efficiency of ligand-based methods. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2000;14(6):559-72
38. Zhu BT, Han GZ, Shim JY, et al. Quantitative structure-activity relationship of various endogenous estrogen metabolites for human estrogen receptor alpha and beta subtypes: insights into the structural determinants favoring a differential subtype binding. Endocrinology 2006;147(9):4132-50
39. EDSTAC. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/endo/pubs/edspoverview/ edstac.htm
40. Klopman G, Chakravarti SK. Screening of high production volume chemicals for estrogen receptor binding activity (II) by the MultiCASE expert system. Chemosphere 2003;51(6):461-8
41. Klopman G, Chakravarti SK. Structure-activity relationship study of a diverse set of estrogen receptor ligands (I) using MultiCASE expert system. Chemosphere 2003;51(6):445-59
42. Waszkowycz B, Perkins TD, Sykes RA, Li J. Large-scale virtual screening for discovering leads in the post-genomic era. IBM Systems J 2001;40(2):360-76
43. Eldridge MD, Murray CW, Auton TR, et al. 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):425-45
44. Mestres J, Rohrer DC, Maggiora GM. A molecular-field-based similarity study of non-nucleoside HIV-1 reverse transcriptase inhibitors. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1999;13(1):79-93
45. Mestres J. Virtual screening: a real screening complement to high-throughput screening. Biochem Soc Trans 2002;30(4):797-9
46. Wang CY, Ai N, Arora S, et al. Identification of previously unrecognized antiestrogenic chemicals using a novel virtual screening approach. Chem Res Toxicol 2006;19(12):1595-601
47. Zhao L, Brinton RD. Structure-based virtual screening for plant-based ERbeta-selective ligands as potential preventative therapy against age-related neurodegenerative diseases. J Med Chem 2005;48(10):3463-6
48. Shao D, Berrodin TJ, Manas E, et al. Identification of novel estrogen receptor alpha antagonists. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2004;88(4-5):351-60
49. De Miguel F, Lee SO, Onate SA, Gao AC. Stat3 enhances transactivation of steroid hormone receptors. Nucl Recept 2003;1(1):3
50. Joseph-McCarthy D, Thomas BET, Belmarsh M, et al. Pharmacophore-based molecular docking to account for ligand flexibility. Proteins 2003;51(2):172-88
51. McCarthy DJ, Thomas BE, Belmarsh M, et al. Pharmacophore-based molecular docking to account for ligand flexibility. Proteins 2003;51:172-88
52. Bologa CG, Revankar CM, Young SM, et al. Virtual and biomolecular screening converge on a selective agonist for GPR30. Nat Chem Biol 2006;2(4):207-12
53. Vivacqua A, Bonofiglio D, Recchia AG, et al. The G protein-coupled receptor GPR30 mediates the proliferative effects induced by 17beta-estradiol and hydroxytamoxifen in endometrial cancer cells. Mol Endocrinol 2006;20(3):631-46
54. Pelekanou V, Kampa M, Kafousi M, et al. Erythropoietin and its receptor in breast cancer: correlation with steroid receptors and outcome. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(10):2016-23