QNA-based 'Star Track' QSAR approach

SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research

Volumn 20, Issue 7-8, 2009, Pages 679-709

  Filimonov, D A ^a   Zakharov, A V ^a   Lagunin, A A ^a   Poroikov, V V ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL CHEMISTRY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Biological activity; GUSAR; QNA; QSAR; Toxicity

Indexed keywords

BIOACTIVITY; COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; MOLECULAR GRAPHICS; MOLECULES; STARS; STATISTICAL METHODS;

DESCRIPTORS; DIMENSIONAL SPACES; GUSAR; MANY DIMENSIONAL; MOLECULAR DESCRIPTORS; NEIGHBOURHOOD; QUANTITATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD OF ATOM; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP METHODS; SINGLE POINT;

ATOMS;

EID: 72149098108     PISSN: 1062936X     EISSN: 1029046X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10629360903438370     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. J. Gasteiger (ed.), Handbooks of Cheminformatics: From Data to Knowledge, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2003.
2. W. Zheng and A. Tropsha, Novel variable selection quantitative structure-property relationship approach based on the k-nearest-neighbor principle, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 40 (2000), pp. 185-194.
3. P. Itskowitz and A. Tropsha, k nearest neighbors QSAR modeling as a variational problem: Theory and applications, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 45 (2005), pp. 777-785.
4. L. Peltason and Ju. Bajorath, Molecular similarity analysis in virtual screening, in Chemoinformatics Approaches to Virtual Screening, A. Varnek and A. Tropsha, eds., RSC Publishing, Cambridge, 2008, pp. 182-216.
5. R. Todeschini and V. Consonni (eds.), Handbook of Molecular Descriptors, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2000.
6. M. Olah, C. Bologa, and TI. Oprea, An automated PLS search for biologically relevant QSAR descriptors, J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design 18 (2004), pp. 437-449.
7. 2, molecular descriptors from 2D structures for chemoinformatics and toxicoinformatics, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 48 (2008), pp. 1337-1344.
8. L. Senese, J. Duca, D. Pan, A. Hopfinger, and Y. Tseng, 4D-fingerprints, universal QSAR and QSPR descriptors, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (2004), pp. 1526-1539.
9. H. Sun, A universal molecular descriptor system for prediction of LogP, LogS, LogBB, and absorption, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (2004), pp. 748-757.
10. F.R. Burden, M.J. Polley, and D.A. Winkler, Toward novel universal descriptors: charge fingerprints, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 49 (2009), pp. 710-715.
11. D. Filimonov, V. Poroikov, Yu. Borodina, and T. Gloriozova, Chemical similarity assessment through multilevel neighborhoods of atoms: Definition and comparison with the other descriptors, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39 (1999), pp. 666-670.
12. V. Poroikov, D. Filimonov, Yu. Borodina, A. Lagunin, and A. Kos, Robustness of biological activity spectra predicting by computer program PASS for noncongeneric sets of chemical compounds, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 40 (2000), pp. 1349-1355.
13. D. Filimonov and V. Poroikov, Probabilistic approaches in activity prediction, in Chemoinformatics Approaches to Virtual Screening, A. Varnek and A. Tropsha, eds., RSC Publishing, Cambridge, 2008, pp. 182-216.
14. D. Filimonov, A. Lagunin, and V. Poroikov, Prediction of activity spectra for substances using new local integrative descriptors, in Proceedings of the 15th European Symposium on Structure-Activity Relationships (QSAR) and Molecular Modelling, E. Aki and I. Yalcin, eds., CADD&D Society in Turkey, Ankara, 2005, pp. 98-99.
15. A. Lagunin, A. Zakharov, D. Filimonov, and V. Poroikov, A new approach to QSAR modelling of acute toxicity, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 18 (2007), pp. 285-298.
16. D. Filimonov, D. Akimov, and V. Poroikov, The method of self-consistent regression for the quantitative analysis of relationships between structure and properties of chemicals, Pharm. Chem. J. 1 (2004), pp. 21-24.
17. A. Bender, H.Y. Mussa, and R.C. Glen, Molecular similarity searching using atom environments, information-based feature selection, and a naive Bayesian classifier, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (2004), pp. 170-178.
18. L. Xing and R.C. Glen, Novel methods for the prediction of logP, pKa, and logD, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 42 (2002), pp. 796-805.
19. W. Guba, Representation of chemicals, in Predictive Toxicology, C. Helma, ed., Marcel Dekker, New York, 2003, pp. 11-35.
20. A. Varnek, D. Fourches, F. Hoonakker, and V.P. Solov'ev, Substructural fragments: An universal language to encode reactions, molecular and supramolecular structures, J. Comp.-Aided Mol. Design 19 (2005), pp. 693-703.
21. I. Baskin and A. Varnek, Fragment descriptors in SAR/QSAR/QSPR studies, molecular similarity analysis and in virtual screening, in Chemoinformatics Approaches to Virtual Screening, A. Varnek and A. Tropsha, eds., RSC Publishing, Cambridge, 2008, pp. 1-43.
22. R. Feynman, Forces in molecules, Phys. Rev. 56 (1939), pp. 340-343.
23. Yu. Borodina, D. Filimonov, and V. Poroikov, Computer-aided estimation of synthetic compounds similarity with endogenous bioregulators, Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 17 (1998), pp. 459-464.
24. N. Dessalew and P. Bharatam, 3D-QSAR and molecular docking study on bisarylmaleimide series as glycogen synthase kinase 3, cyclin dependent kinase 2 and cyclin dependent kinase 4 inhibitors: An insight into the criteria for selectivity, Eur. J. Med. Chem. 42 (2007), pp. 1014-1027.
25. J. Jeffrey, A. Lee, and F. Donald, A comparison of methods for modeling quantitative structure-activity relationships, J. Med. Chem. 47 (2004), pp. 5541-5554.
26. M. Lopez-Rodriguez, L. Rosado, B. Benhamu, J. Morcillo, E. Fernandez, and K.J. Schaper, Synthesis and structure-activity relationships of a new model of arylpiperazines. 2. Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships of hydantoin-phenylpiperazine derivatives with affinity for 5-HT1A and 1 receptors. A comparison of CoMFA models, J. Med. Chem. 40 (1997), pp. 1648-1656.
27. S. Mukherjee, A. Sahaa, and K. Roy, QSAR of estrogen receptor modulators: Exploring selectivity requirements for ERa versus ERb binding of tetrahydroisoquinoline derivatives using E-state and physicochemical parameters, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 15 (2005), pp. 957-961.
28. K. Roy and G. Ghosh, QSRT with extended topochemical atom indices. 4. Modeling the acute toxicity of phenylsulfonyl carboxylates to Vibrio fischeri using principal component factor analysis and principal component regression analysis, QSAR Comb. Sci. 23 (2004), pp. 526-535.
29. T. Netzeva, J. Dearden, R. Edwards, A. Worgan, and M. Cronin, QSAR analysis of the toxicity of aromatic compounds to Chlorella vulgaris in a novel short-term assay, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (2004), pp. 258-265.
30. M. Cronin, A. Aptula, J. Duffy, T. Netzeva, P. Rowe, I. Valkova, and T. Schultz, Comparative assessment of methods to develop QSARs for the prediction of the toxicity of phenols to Tetrahymena pyriformis, Chemosphere 49 (2002), pp. 1201-1221.
31. A. Poso, J. Gynther, and R. Juvonen, A comparative molecular field analysis of cytochrome P450 2A5 and 2A6 inhibitors, J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design 15 (2001), pp. 195-202.
32. M. Knockaert, P. Greengard, and L. Meijer, Pharmacological inhibitors of cyclin-dependent kinases, Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 23 (2002), pp. 417-425.
33. A. Golbraikh and A. Tropsha, Predictive QSAR modeling based on diversity sampling of experimental datasets for the training and test set selection, J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design 16 (2002), pp. 357-369.
34. I.V. Tetko, Iu. Sushko, A.K. Pandey, H. Zhu, A. Tropsha, E. Papa, T. Oberg, R. Todeschini, D. Fourches, and A. Varnek, Critical assessment of QSAR models of environmental toxicity against Tetrahymena pyriformis: Focusing on applicability domain and overfitting by variable selection, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 48 (2008), pp. 1733-1746.
35. A. Tropsha, P. Gramatica, and V. Gombar, The importance of being earnest: Validation is the absolute essential for successful application and interpretation of QSPR models, QSAR Comb. Sci. 22 (2003), pp. 69-77.
36. X. Liu, Z. Yang, and L. Wang, CoMFA of the acute toxicity of phenylsulfonyl carboxylates to Vibrio fischeri, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 14 (2003), pp. 183-190.
37. K. Roy and G. Ghosh, QSTR with extended topochemical atom indices. Part 5: Modeling of the acute toxicity of phenylsulfonyl carboxylates to Vibrio fischeri using genetic function approximation, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 13 (2005), pp. 1185-1194.
38. M. Hewitt, M. Cronin, J. Madden, P. Rowe, C. Johnson, A. Obi, and S. Enoch, Consensus QSAR models: Do the benefits outweigh the complexity?, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 47 (2007), pp. 1460-1468.
39. S. Enoch, M. Cronin, T. Schultz, and J. Madden, An evaluation of global QSAR models for the prediction of the toxicity of phenols to Tetrahymena pyriformis, Chemosphere 71 (2008), pp. 1225-1232.
40. V. Vapnik, Estimation of Dependencies Based on Empirical Data, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1982.
41. H. Hong, H. Fang, Q. Xie, R. Perkins, D.M. Sheehan, and W. Tong, Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA) model using a large diverse set of natural, synthetic and environmental chemicals for binding to the androgen receptor, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 14 (2003), pp. 373-388.
42. A. Afantitis, G. Melagraki, H. Sarimveis, P. Koutentis, J. Markopoulos, and O. Igglessi-Markopoulou, A novel QSAR model for evaluating and predicting the inhibition activity of Dipeptidyl Aspartyl Fluoromethylketones, QSAR Comb. Sci. 10 (2006), pp. 928-935.