Beyond the virtual screening paradigm: Structure-based searching for new lead compounds

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 49, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 800-809

  Schlosser, Jochen ^a   Rarey, Matthias ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPLEXATION; DIGITAL LIBRARIES; LIGANDS; MOLECULES; PROTEINS;

APPLICATION SCENARIO; BIOACTIVE CONFORMATION; DOCKING CALCULATIONS; ENRICHMENT EXPERIMENTS; INTERACTION PATTERN; PROTEIN-LIGAND COMPLEXES; SEQUENTIAL PROCEDURES; SHAPE COMPLEMENTARITY;

LEAD COMPOUNDS;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DOCUMENTATION; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; MODELS, MOLECULAR; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; SUBJECT HEADINGS;

EID: 66149105428     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci9000212     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Rester, U. From Virtuality to Reality - Virtual Screening in Lead Discovery and Lead Optimization: A Medicinal Chemistry Perspective. Curr. Opin. Drug Discovery Dey. 2008, 11 (4), 559-568.
2. Gribbon, P.; Lyons, R.; Laflin, P.; Bradley, J.; Chambers, C.; Williams, B.; Keighley, W.; Sewing, A. Evaluating Real-Life High-Throughput Screening Data. J. Biomol. Screenins 2005, 10, 99-107.
3. Leach, A.; Hann, M. The in Silico World of Virtual Libraries. Drug Discovery Today 2000, 5 (8), 326-336.
4. Reynolds, C.; Tounge, B.; Bembenek, S. Ligand Binding Efficiency: Trends, Physical Basis, and Implications. J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51 (8), 2432-2438.
5. Hann, M.; Leach, A.; Harper, G. Molecular Complexity and Its Impact on the Probability of Finding Leads for Drug Discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2001, 41 (3), 856-864.
6. Hajduk, P. J.; Greer, J. A decade of fragment-based drug design: strategic advances and lessons learned. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2007, 6 (3), 211-219.
7. Friesner, R. A.; Banks, J. L.; Murphy, R. B.; Halgren, T. A.; Klicic, J. J.; Mainz, D. T.; Repasky, M. P.; Knoll, E. H.; Shelley, M.; Perry, J. K.; Shaw, D. E.; Francis, P.; Shenkin, P. S. Glide: A New Approach for Rapid, Accurate Docking and Scoring. 1. Method and Assessment of Docking Accuracy. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 1739-1749.
8. Jones, G.; Willett, P.; Glen, R. C. Molecular Recognition of Receptor Sites using a Genetic Algorithm with a Description of Desolvation. J. Mol. Biol. 1995, 245, 43-53.
9. Abagyan, R.; Totrov, M.; Kuznetsov, D. ICM - A New Method for Protein Modeling and Design: Applications to Docking and Structure Prediction from the Distorted Native Conformation. J. Comput. Chem. 1994, 15 (5), 488-506.
10. Morris, G. M.; Goodsell, D. S.; Halliday, R. S.; Huey, R.; Hart, W. E.; 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.
11. Rarey, M.; Kramer, B.; Lengauer, T.; Klebe, G. A Fast Flexible Docking Method using an Incremental Construction Algorithm. J. Mol. Biol. 1996, 261 (3), 470-489.
12. Warren, G. L.; Andrews, C. W.; Cpelli, 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.; Head, M. S. A Critical Assessment of Docking Programs and Scoring Functions. J. Med. Chem. 2005, xx. in press.
13. Moitessier, N.; Englebienne, P.; Lee, D.; Lawandi, J.; Corbeil, C. R. Towards the Development of Universal, Fast and Highly Accurate Docking/Scoring Methods: A Long Way to go. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2008, 153, S7-S26.
14. 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 (20), 5851-5.
15. Rarey, M.; Degen, J.; Reulecke, I. Docking and Scoring for Structure-Based Drug Design. In Bioinformatics - From Genomes to Therapies; Lengauer, T., Ed.; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2005; Vol. 2, pp 541-600.
16. Cozzini, P.; Kellogg, G. E.; Spyrakis, F.; Abraham, D.; Costantino, G.; Emerson, A.; Fanelli, F.; Gohlke, H.; Kuhn, L. A.; Morris, G. M.; Orozco, M.; Pertinhez, T. A.; Rizzi, M.; Sotriffer, C. A. Target Flexibility: An Emerging Consideration in Drug Discovery and Design. J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51 (20), 6237-6255.
17. Teodoro, M. L.; Kavraki, L. E. Conformational flexibility models for the receptor in structure based drug design. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2003, 9, 1635-1648.
18. Osman, G. Pharmacophore Perception, Development, and Use in Drug Design; International University Line: La Jolla, CA, 2000.
19. Langer, T.; Hoffmann, R.; Mannhold, R. Pharmacophores and Pharmacophore Searches; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, Germany, 2006.
20. Joseph-McCarthy, D.; Thomas(IV), B. E.; Belmarsh, M.; Moustakas, D.; Alvarez, J. C. Pharmacophore-based molecular docking to account for ligand flexibility. Proteins: Struct. Fund. Genet. 2003, 51, 172-188.
21. Meng, E. C.; Shoichet, B. K.; Kuntz, I. D. Automated Docking with Grid-Based Energy Evaluation. J. Comput. Chem. 1992, 13 (4), 505-524.
22. Ewing, T. J. A.; Makino, S.; Skillman, A. G.; Kuntz, I. D. DOCK 4.0: Search strategies for automated molecular docking of flexible molecule databases. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 411-428.
23. Discovery Studio, version 2.1; Accelrys: San Diego, CA, 92121, U.S.A, 2008.
24. Wolber, G.; Langer, T. LigandScout: 3-D pharmacophores derived from protein-bound ligands and their use as virtual screening filters. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45 (1), 160-9.
25. Dixon, S. L.; Smondyrev, A. M.; Knoll, E. H.; Rao, S. N.; Shaw, D. E.; Friesner, R. A. PHASE: a new engine for pharmacophore perception, 3D QSAR model development, and 3D database screening: 1. Metholology and preliminary results. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2006, 20, 647-671.
26. Unity, version 8; Tripos Inc.: St. Louis, MO, U.S.A., 2008.
27. Ebalunode, J. O.; Ouyang, Z.; Liang, J.; Zheng, W. Novel Approach to Structure-Based Pharmacophore Search Using Computational Geometry and Shape Matching Techniques. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48 (4), 889-901.
28. OEShape Toolkit, version 1.6; OpenEye Scientific Software: Santa Fe, NM, 87507, U.S.A., 2006.
29. Schellhammer, I.; Rarey, M. TrixX: Structure-Based Molecule Indexing for Large-Scale Virtual Screening in Sublinear Time. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2007, 21, 223-238.
30. Schellhammer, I.; Rarey, M. FlexX-Scan: Fast Structure-Based Virtual Screening. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 2004, 57, 504-517.
31. Wermuth, C. G.; Ganellin, C. R.; Lindberg, P.; Mitscher, L. A. Glossary of terms used in medicinal chemistry (IUPAC recommendations 1998); IUPAC: 1998; Vol. 70, pp 1129-1143.
32. Gasteiger, J.; Rudolph, C.; Sadowski, J. Automatic Generation of 3D-Atomic Coordinates for Organic Molecules. Tetrahedron Comput. Methodol. 1990, 3, 537-547.
33. Nayal, M.; Honig, B. On the nature of cavities on protein surfaces: application to the identification of drug-binding sites. Proteins 2006, 63 (4), 892-906.
34. Wu, K. FastBit: an efficient indexing technology for accelerating data-intensive science. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2005, 16, 556-560.
35. Hartshorn, M. J.; Verdonk, M. L.; Chessari, G.; Brewerton, S. C.; Mooij, W. T. M.; Mortenson, P. N.; Murray, C. W. Diverse, High- Quality Test Set for the Validation of Protein-Ligand Docking Performance. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 726-741.
36. Huang, N.; Shoichet, B. K.; Irwin, J. J. Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49 (23), 6789-6801.
37. Hindle, S. A.; Rarey, M.; Buning, C.; Lengauer, T. Flexible Docking under Pharmacophore Type Constraints. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16, 129-149.
38. Irwin, J. J.; Shoichet, B. K. ZINC-a free database of commercially available compounds for virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model 2005, 45 (1), 177-82.
39. Oprea, T. I.; Davis, A. M.; Teague, S. J.; Leeson, P. D. Is There a Difference between Leads and Drugs? A Historical Perspective. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1308-1315.
40. Stahl, M.; Todorov, N. P.; James, T.; Mauser, H.; Boehm, H.-J.; Dean, P. M. A validation study on the practical use of automated de novo design. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16, 459-478.
41. Kramer, B.; Rarey, M.; Lengauer, T. Evaluation of the FlexX incremental construction algorithm for protein-ligand docking. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 1999, 37, 228-241.
42. YASARA, version 8; YASARA Biosciences: 8042 Graz, Austria 2008.
43. Duan, Y.; Wu, C.; Chowdhury, S.; Lee, M. C.; Xiong, G.; Zhang, W.; Yang, R.; Cieplak, P.; Luo, R. T. L. A Point-Charge Force Field for Molecular Mechanics Simulations of Proteins. J. Comput. Chem. 2003, 24, 1999-2012.