The GRID/CPCA approach in drug discovery

Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 333-346

  Rocha, Josmar R ^a   Freitas, Renato F ^a   Montanari, Carlos A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Family target selectivity; GRID GOLPE; Molecular interaction field; Pharmacophores; Virtual screening

Indexed keywords

PROTEIN DERIVATIVE;

CHEMOMETRIC ANALYSIS; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG POTENCY; DRUG SELECTIVITY; HYDROPHOBICITY; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; MOLECULAR RECOGNITION; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; REVIEW;

EID: 77950204768     PISSN: 17460441     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1517/17460441003652959     Document Type: Review

References (73)

1. Brooijmans N, Kuntz ID. Molecular recognition and docking algorithms. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2003;32:335-373
2. Davis AM, Teague SJ. Hydrogen bonding, hydrophobic interactions, and failure of the rigid receptor hypothesis. Angew Chem Int Ed 1999;38:736-749
3. Lengauer T, Lemmen C, Rarey M, Zimmermann M. Novel technologies for virtual screening. Drug Discov Today 2004;9:27-34
4. Ghosh S, Nie A, An J, Huang Z. Structure-based virtual screening of chemical libraries for drug discovery. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2006;10:194-202
5. Cheeseright T, Mackey M, Rose S, Vinter A. Molecular field technology applied to virtual screening and finding the bioactive conformation. Exp Opin Drug Discov 2007;2:131-144
6. Leitão A, Andricopulo AA, Montanari CA. 3D quantitative structure-activity relationships: the threedimensional road to lead design in "current methods in medicinal chemistry and biological physics". In: Taft CA, Carlos HTP, editors. (Volume 1). Silva Research Signpost 37/661 (2), Fort P.O., Trivandrum-695 023, Kerala, India; 2007. p. 61-90. ISBN: 81-308-0141-8
7. Cross S, Cruciani G. Molecular fields in drug discovery: getting old or reaching maturity? Drug Discov Today 2009: published online 14 January 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2008.12.006
8. Crivori P, Cruciani G, Carrupt PA, Testa B. Predicting blood-brain barrier permeation from threedimensional molecular structure. J Med Chem 2000;43:2204-2216
9. Cramer III RD, Patterson DE, Bunce JD. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J Am Chem Soc 1988;110:5959-5967
10. Goodford PJ. A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. J Med Chem 1985;28:849-857
11. von Itzstein M, et al. Rational design of potent sialidase-based inhibitors of influenza virus replication. Nature 1993;363:418-423
12. Schmitt S, Kuhn D, Klebe G. A New method to detect related function among proteins independent of sequence and fold homology. J Mol Bio 2002;323:387-406
13. Daniel K, Nils W, Eyke H, Gerhard G. Functional classification of protein kinase binding sites using Cavbase. ChemMedChem 2007;2:1432-1447
14. Weber A, Casini A, Heine A, et al. Unexpected nanomolar inhibition of carbonic anhydrase by COX-2-selective celecoxib: new pharmacological opportunities due to related binding site recognition. J Med Chem 2003;47:550-557
15. Kuhn D, Weskamp N, Schmitt S, et al. From the similarity analysis of protein cavities to the functional classification of protein families using cavbase. J Mol Biol 2006;359:1023-1044
16. Cruciani G, Goodford PJ. A search for specificity in DNA-drug interactions. J Mol Graph 1994;12:116-129
17. Pastor M, Cruciani G. A novel strategy for improving ligand selectivity in receptor-based drug design. J Med Chem 1995;38:4637-4647
18. Ridderström M, Zamora I, Fjellström O, Andersson TB. Analysis of selective regions in the active sites of human cytochromes P450, 2C8, 2C9, 2C18, and 2C19 homology models using GRID/CPCA. J Med Chem 2001;44:4072-4081
19. Cruciani G. Molecular interaction fields: application in drug discovery and ADME prediction. Wiley-VCH, Zurich, 2006
20. Leach AR, Gillet VJ. An introduction to chemoinformatics. Springer, Dordrecht, 2007
21. Kastenholz MA, Pastor M, Cruciani G, et al. GRID/CPCA: a new computational tool to design selective ligands. J Med Chem 2000;43:3033-3044
22. Montanari MLC, Andricopulo AD, Montanari CA. Calorimetry and structure-activity relationships for a series of antimicrobial hydrazides. Thermochimica Acta 2004;417:283-294
23. Davis AM, St-Gallay SA, Kleywegt GJ. Limitations and lessons in the use of X-ray structural information in drug design. Drug Discov Today 2008;13:831-841
24. Terp GE, Cruciani G, Christensen IT, Jorgensen FS. Structural differences of matrix metalloproteinases with potential implications for inhibitor selectivity examined by the GRID/CPCA approach. J Med Chem 2002;45:2675-2684
25. Myshkin E, Wang B. Chemometrical classification of ephrin ligands and Eph kinases using GRID/CPCA approach. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2003;43:1004-1010
26. Matter H, Kumar HSA, Fedorov R, et al. Structural analysis of isoformspecific inhibitors targeting the tetrahydrobiopterin binding site of human nitric oxide synthases. J Med Chem 2005;48:4783-4792
27. Pirard B. Peroxisome proliferatoractivated receptors target family landscape: a chemometrical approach to ligand selectivity based on protein binding site analysis. J Comput Aided Mol Design 2003;17:785-796
28. Vulpetti A, Crivori P, Cameron A, et al. Structure-based approaches to improve selectivity: CDK2-GSK3 binding site analysis. J Chem Inf Model 2005;45:1282-1290
29. Ji H, Li H, Flinspach M, et al. Computer modeling of selective regions in the active site of nitric oxide synthases: implication for the design of isoformselective inhibitors. J Med Chem 2003;46:5700-5711
30. Cruciani G, Carosati E, De Boeck B, et al. MetaSite: understanding metabolism in human cytochromes from the perspective of the Chemist. J Med Chem 2005;48:6970-6979
31. Matter H, Schwab W. Affinity and selectivity of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors: a chemometrical study fromthe perspective of ligands and proteins. J Med Chem 1999;42:4506-4523
32. Filipponi E, Cecchetti V, Tabarrini O, et al. Chemometric rationalization of the structural andphysicochemical basis for selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition: toward more specific ligands. J Comput AidedMol Des 2000;14:277-291
33. Braiuca P, Ebert C, Fischer L, et al. A homology model of penicillin acylase from Alcaligenes faecalis and in silico evaluation of its selectivity. ChemBioChem 2003;4:615-622
34. Braiuca P, Cruciani G, Ebert C, et al. An innovative application of the "flexible" GRID/PCA computational method: study of differences in selectivity between PGAs from Escherichia coli and a Providentia rettgeri mutant. Biotechnol Prog 2004;20:1025-1031
35. Nicolotti O, Miscioscia TF, Carotti A, et al. An integrated approach to ligandand structure-based drug design: development and application to a series of serine protease inhibitors. J Chem Inf Model 2008;48:1211-1226
36. Gohlke H, Klebe G. DrugScore meets CoMFA: adaptation of fields for molecular comparison (AFMoC) or how to tailor knowledge-based pair-potentials to a particular protein. J Med Chem 2002;45:4153-4170
37. Afzelius L, Raubacher F, Karlén A, et al. Structural analysis of CYP2C9 and CYP2C5 and an evaluation of commonly used molecular modeling techniques, Drug Metab Dispos 2004;32:1218-1229
38. Naumann T, Matter H. Structural classification of protein kinases using 3D molecular interaction field analysis of their ligand binding sites: target family landscapes. J Med Chem 2002;45:2366-2378
39. Pirard B, Matter H. Matrix metalloproteinase target family landscape: a chemometrical approach to ligand selectivity based on protein binding site analysis. J Med Chem 2006;49:51-69
40. Matter H, Kotsonis P. Biology and chemistry of the inhibition of nitric oxide synthases by pteridine-derivatives as therapeutic agents. Med Res Rev 2004;24:662-684
41. Pirard B. Computational methods for the identification and optimisation of high quality leads. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 2004;7:271-280
42. Kurz M, Brachvogel V, Matter H, et al. Insights into the bile acid transportation system: the human ileal lipidbinding protein-cholyltaurine complex and its comparison with homologous structures. Proteins Struct Funct Genet 2003;50:312-328
43. de Menezes IRA, Leitão A, Montanari CA. Estrogen receptor: structural differences and potential implications on selectivity examined by the GRID/CPCA approach. Lett Drug Design Discov 2008;5:182-192
44. Menezes IRA, Leitão A, Montanari CA. Three-dimensional models of nonsteroidal ligands: a comparative molecular field analysis. Steroids 2006;71:417-428
45. Alderton WK, Cooper CE, Knowles RG. Nitric oxide synthases: Structure, function and inhibition. Biochem J 2001;357:593-615
46. Wienkers LC, Heath TG. Predicting in vivo drug interactions from in vitro drug discovery data. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2005;4:825-833
47. Lill MA, Dobler M, Vedani A. Prediction of small-molecule binding to cytochrome P450 3A4: flexible docking combined with multidimensional QSAR. ChemMedChem 2006;1:73-81
48. Zhang D, Zhu M, Humphreys WG, Iyer R. Role of drug metabolism in drug development. John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, 2008
49. Breu B, Silber K, andGohlke H. Consensus adaptation of fields for molecular comparison (AFMoC) models incorporate ligand and receptor conformational variability into tailormade scoring functions. J Chem Inf Model 2007;47:2383-2400
50. Skiles JW, Gonnella NC, Jeng AY. The design, structure, and therapeutic application of matrix metalloprotease inhibitors. Curr Med Chem 2001;8:425-474
51. Robinson RP, Laird ER, Blake JF, et al. Structure-based design and synthesis of a potent matrix metalloproteinase- 13 inhibitor based on a pyrrolidinone scaffold. J Med Chem 2000;43:2293-2296
52. Hanessian S, MacKay DB, Moitessier N. Design and synthesis of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors guided by molecular modeling. Picking the S1 pocket using conformationally constrained inhibitors. J Med Chem 2001;44:3074-3082
53. Wu J, Rush TS III, Hotchandani R, et al. Identification of potent and selective MMP-13 inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2005;15:4105-4109
54. Daub H, Specht K, Ullrich A. Strategies to overcome resistance to targeted protein kinase inhibitors. Nat Ver Drug Discov 2004;3:1001-1010
55. Pastor M, Cruciani G, Mclay I, et al. GRID-independent descriptors (GRIND): a novel class of alignmentindependent three-dimensional molecular descriptors. J Med Chem 2000;43:3233-3243
56. Gutiérrez-de-Terán H, Centeno NB, Pastor M, Sanz F. Novel approaches for modeling of the A1 adenosine receptor and its agonist binding site. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinformatics 2004;54:705-715
57. Lomize AL, Reibarkh MY, Pogozheva ID. Interatomic potentials and solvation parameters from protein engineering data for buried residues. Protein Sci 2002;11:1984-2000
58. Mittal RR, Harris L, McKinnon RA, Sorich MJ. Partial charge calculation method affects CoMFA QSAR prediction accuracy. J Chem Information Model 2009;49:704-709
59. Liljefors T. Progress in forcefield calculations of molecular interaction fields and intermolecular interactions. Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design 1998;9-11:3-17
60. Olsson TS, Williams MA, Pitt WR, Ladbury JE. The thermodynamics of protein-ligand interaction and solvation: insights for ligand design. J Mol Biol 2008;384:1002-1017
61. Koshland DE. Application of a theory of enzyme specificity to protein synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1958;44:98-104
62. Davis AM, Teague SJ, Kleywegt GJ. Application and limitations of X-ray crystallographic data in structure-based ligand and drug design. Angew Chem Int Ed 2003;42:2718-2736
63. Ababou A, Ladbury JE. Survey of the year 2005: literature on applications of isothermal titration calorimetry J Mol Recognit 2007;20:4-14
64. Klebe G, Abraham U, Mietzner T. Molecular similarity indices in a comparative analysis (CoMSIA) of drug molecules to correlate and predict their biological activity. J Med Chem 1994;37:4130-4146
65. Kellogg GE, Semus SF, Abraham DJ. HINT: a new method of empirical hydrophobic field calculation for CoMFA. J Comput Aid Mol Des 1991;5:545-552
66. Doweyko AM, The hypothetical active site lattice- in vitro and in vivo explorations using a threedimensional QSAR technique. J Math Chem 1991;7:273-285
67. Jain AN, Koile K, Chapman D. Compass: predicting biological activities from molecular surface properties. Performance comparisons on a steroid benchmark. J Med Chem 1994;37:2315-2327
68. Baroni M, Cruciani G, Sciabola S, et al. A common reference framework for analyzing/comparing proteins and ligands. Fingerprints for ligands and proteins (FLAP): theory and application. J Chem Inf Model 2007;47:279-294
69. Goodford P. Multivariate characterization of molecules for QSAR analysis. J Chemom 1996;10:107-117
70. Cruciani G, Pastor M, Guba W. VolSurf, a new tool for the pharmacokinetic optimization of lead compounds. Eur J Pharm Sci 2000;11:S29-39
71. Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Taylor R. SuperStar: a knowledge-based approach for identifying interaction sites in proteins. J Mol Biol 1999;289:1093-1108
72. Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Watson P, et al. SuperStar: improved knowledgebased interaction fields for protein binding sites. J Mol Biol 2001;307:841-859
73. Pirard B. Structure-based chemogenomics: analysis of protein family landscapes in "Chemogenomics: Methods and Applications". Series: Methods in Molecular Biology, 2009;575:281-296