Use of reduced graphs to encode bioisosterism for similarity-based virtual screening

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 49, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1330-1346

  Birchall, Kristian ^a   Gillet, Valerie J ^a   Willett, Peter ^a   Ducrot, Pierre ^b   Luttmann, Claude ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b Discngine   (France)

^c SANOFI   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATABASE SYSTEMS; ENCODING (SYMBOLS); SCAFFOLDS;

ACTIVE STRUCTURES; EXPLICIT INFORMATION; REDUCED GRAPHS; SCAFFOLD HOPPING; SIMILARITY SEARCHING; VIRTUAL SCREENING;

INFORMATION USE;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; COMPUTER INTERFACE; DRUG SCREENING; FACTUAL DATABASE; METHODOLOGY; STANDARD; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

COMPUTER GRAPHICS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; REFERENCE STANDARDS; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 67650086695     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci900078h     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Gasteiger, J. Handbook of Chemoinformatics; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, Germany, 2003.
2. Leach, A. R.; Gillet, V. J. An Introduction to Chemoinformatics, 2nd edition ed.; Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2007.
3. Willett, P. From Chemical Documentation to Chemoinformatics: Fifty Years of Chemical Information Science. J. Inf. Sci. 2008, 34, 477-499.
4. Friedman, H. L. Influence of Isosteric Replacements Upon Biological Activity 206; National Academy of Sciences-USA: Washington, DC, 1951; pp 295-300.
5. Thornber, C. W. Isosterism and Molecular Modification in Drug Design. Quart. Rev. Chem. 1979, 8, 563-579.
6. Burger, A. Isosterism and Bioisosterism in Drug Design. Prog. Drug Res. 1991, 37, 287-367.
7. Patani, G. A.; LaVoie, E. J. Bioisosterism: A Rational Approach in Drug Design. Chem. Rev. 1996, 96, 3147-3176.
8. Kubinyi, H. Similarity and Dissimilarity: A Medicinal Chemist's View. Perspect. Drug Discovery Des. 1998, 9-11, 225-232.
9. Olesen, P. H. The Use of Bioisosteric Groups in Lead Optimisation. Curr. Opin. Drug Discovery Dev. 2001, 4, 471-478.
10. Böhm, H.-J.; Flohr, A.; Stahl, M. Scaffold Hopping. Drug Discovery Today: Technol. 2004, 1, 217-224.
11. Lima, L. M.; Barreiro, E. J. Bioisosterism: A Useful Strategy for Molecular Modification and Drug Design. Curr. Med. Chem. 2005, 12, 23-49.
12. Schneider, G.; Schneider, P.; Renner, S. Scaffold-Hopping: How Far Can You Jump. QSAR Comb. Sci. 2006, 25, 1162-171.
13. Brown, N.; Jacoby, E. On Scaffolds and Hopping in Medicinal Chemistry. Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 2006, 6, 1217-1229.
14. Ujváry, I. Bioster - a Database of Structurally Analogous Compounds. Pest. Sci. 1997, 51, 92-95.
15. Schuffenhauer, A.; Gillet, V. J.; Willett, P. Similarity Searching in Files of Three-Dimensional Chemical Structures: Analysis of the Bioster Database Using Two-Dimensional Fingerprints and Molecular Field Descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 295-307.
16. Holliday, J. D.; Jelfs, S. P.; Willett, P. Calculation of Intersubstutuent Similarity Using R-Group Descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 406-411.
17. Wagener, M.; Lommerse, J. P. M. The Quest for Bioisosteric Replacements. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 677-685.
18. Carhart, R. E.; Smith, D. H.; Venkataraghavan, R. Atom Pairs as Molecular-Features in Structure Activity Studies - Definition and Applications. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1985, 25, 64-73.
19. Sheridan, R. P. The Most Common Chemical Replacements in Drug-Like Compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 103-108.
20. Haubertin, D. Y.; Bruneau, P. A Database of Historically-Observed Chemical Replacements. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1294-1302.
21. Leach, A. G.; Jones, H. D.; Cosgrove, D. A.; Kenny, P. W.; Ruston, L.; MacFaul, P.; Wood, J. M.; Colclough, N.; Law, B. Matched Molecular Pairs as a Guide Inthe Optimization of Pharmaceutical Properties: A Study of Aqueous Solubility, Plasma Protein Binding and Oral Exposure. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 6672-6682.
22. Sheridan, R. P.; Hunt, P.; Culbertson, J. C. Molecular Transformations as a Way of Finding and Exploiting Consistent Local QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 180-192.
23. Watson, P.; Willett, P.; Gillet, V. J.; Verdonk, M. L. Calculating the Knowledge-Based Similarity of Functional Groups Using Crystallographic Data. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 835-857.
24. Bruno, I. J.; Cole, J. C.; Lommerse, J. P. M.; Rowland, R. S.; Taylor, R.; Verdonk, M. L. Isostar: A Library of Information About Non-bonded Interactions. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 525-537.
25. Kennewell, E. A.; Willett, P.; Ducrot, P.; Luttman, C. Identification of Target-Specific Bioisosteric Fragments from Ligand-Protein Crystallographic Data. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2006, 20, 385-394.
26. Gillet, V. J.; Willett, P.; Bradshaw, J. Similarity Searching Using Reduced Graphs. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 338-345.
27. Gillet, V. J.; Downs, G. M.; Ling, A.; Lynch, M. F.; Venkataram, P.; Wood, J. V.; Dethlefsen, W. Computer-Storage and Retrieval of Generic Chemical Structures in Patents. 8. Reduced Chemical Graphs and Their Applications in Generic Chemical-Structure Retrieval. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1987, 27, 126-137.
28. Rarey, M.; Dixon, J. S. Feature Trees: A New Molecular Similarity Measure Based on Tree Matching. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1998, 12, 471-490.
29. Rarey, M.; Stahl, M. Similarity Searching in Large Combinatorial Chemistry Spaces. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 497-520.
30. Gerlach, C.; Broughton, H.; Zaliani, A. F. Tree Query Construction for Virtual Screening: A Statistical Analysis. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2008, 22, 111-118.
31. Barker, E. J.; Buttar, D.; Cosgrove, D. A.; Gardiner, E. J.; Gillet, V. J.; Kitts, P.; Willett, P. Scaffold-Hopping Using Clique Detection Applied to Reduced Graphs. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 503-511.
32. Harper, G.; Bravi, G. S.; Pickett, S. D.; Hussain, J.; Green, D. V. S. The Reduced Graph Descriptor in Virtual Screening and Data-Driven Clustering of High-Throughput Screening Data. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 2145-2156.
33. Birchall, K.; Gillet, V. J.; Harper, G.; Pickett, S. D. Training Similarity Measures for Specific Activities: Application to Reduced Graphs. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 577-586.
34. Stiefl, N.; Watson, I. A.; Baumann, K.; Zaliani, A. ERG: 2D Pharmacophore Descriptions for Scaffold Hopping. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 208-220.
35. Stiefl, N.; Zaliani, A. A Knowledge-Based Weighting Approach to Ligand-Based Virtual Screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 587-596.
36. Takahashi, Y.; Sukekawa, M.; Sasaki, S. Automatic Identification of Molecular Similarity Using Reduced-Graph Representation of Chemical-Structure. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1992, 32, 639-643.
37. Gardiner, E. J.; Gillet, V. J.; Willett, P.; Cosgrove, D. A. Representing Clusters Using a Maximum Common Edge Substructure Algorithm Applied to Reduced Graphs and Molecular Graphs. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 354-366.
38. Birchall, K.; Gillet, V. J.; Harper, G.; Pickett, S. D. Evolving Interpretable Structure-Activity Relationships. 1. Reduced Graph Queries. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1543-1557.
39. Birchall, K.; Gillet, V. J.; Harper, G.; Pickett, S. D. Evolving Interpretable Structure-Activity Relationship Models. 2. Using Multiobjective Optimization to Derive Multiple Models. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1558-1570.
40. Whittle, M.; Gillet, V. J.; Willett, P.; Alex, A.; Loesel, J. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Virtual Screening by Fusing Nearest Neighbor Lists: A Comparison of Similarity Coefficients. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1840-1848.
41. Henikoff, S.; Henikoff, J. G. Amino Acid Substitution Matrices from Protein Blocks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 10915-10919.