Chemogenomics-Based Design of GPCR-Targeted Libraries Using Data Mining Techniques

Pharmaceutical Data Mining: Approaches and Applications for Drug Discovery

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 175-204

  Balakin, Konstantin V ^a   Bovina, Elena V ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF PHYSIOLOGICALLY ACTIVE COMPOUNDS   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Chemogenomics based design of GPCR targeted libraries and data mining techniques; Mining chemogenomics space; World of Molecular Bioactivity (WOMBAT) developed at Sunset Molecular Discovery

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952544590     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470567623.ch6     Document Type: Chapter

References (75)

1. Wise A, Gearing K, Rees S. Target validation of G-protein coupled receptors. Drug Discov Today 2002; 7: 235-246.
2. Lagerström MC, Schiöth HB. Structural diversity of G protein-coupled receptors and significance for drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2008; 7: 339-357.
3. Oprea TI. Chemical space navigation in lead discovery. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2002; 6: 384-389.
4. Proudfoot JR, John R. Drugs, leads, and drug-likeness: An analysis of some recently launched drugs. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2002; 12: 1647-1650.
5. Evers A, Klabunde T. Structure-based drug discovery using GPCR homology modeling: Successful virtual screening for antagonists of the alpha1A adrenergic receptor. J Med Chem 2005; 48: 1088-1097.
6. Cavasotto CN, Orry AJW, Abagyan RA. Structure-based identification of binding sites, native ligands and potential inhibitors for G-protein coupled receptors. Proteins 2003; 51: 423-433.
7. Kohonen T. Self-Organizing Maps, 3rd edn. New York: Springer Verlag, 2000.
8. Sammon, JE. A nonlinear mapping for data structure analysis. IEEE Trans. Comput., 1969; C-18, 401-409.
9. Savchuk NP, Tkachenko SE, Balakin KV. Cheminformatics in Drug Discovery, pp. 287-313. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH, 2004.
10. Schneider G, Nettekoven M. Ligand-based combinatorial design of selective purinergic receptor (A2A) antagonists using self-organizing maps. J Comb Chem 2003; 5: 233-237.
11. Agrafiotis DK, Myslik JC, Salemme FR. Advances in diversity profiling and combinatorial series design. Mol Divers 1999; 4: 1-22.
12. Kier LB, Hall LH. Molecular Structure Description: The Electrotopological State. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1999.
13. Vogt I, Bajorath J. Design and exploration of target-selective chemical space representations. J Chem Inf Model 2008; 48: 1389-1395.
14. Rusinko A III, Farmen MW, Lambert CG, Brown PL, Young SS. Analysis of a large structure/biological activity data set using recursive partitioning. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1999; 39: 1017-1026.
15. Chen X, Rusinko A, Young SS. Recursive partitioning analysis of a large structureactivity data set using three-dimensional descriptors. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1998; 38: 1054-1062.
16. Horvath D. Recursive partitioning analysis of μ-opiate receptor high throughput screening results. SAR QSAR Environ Res 2001; 12: 181-212.
17. Weber L, Wallbaum S, Broger C, Gubernator K. Optimization of the biological activity of combinatorial compound libraries by a genetic algorithm. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 1995; 34: 2280-2282.
18. Jones-Hertzog DK, Mukhopadhyay P, Keefer CE, Young SS. Use of recursive partitioning in the sequential screening of G-protein-coupled receptors. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 1999; 42: 207-215.
19. Lavrador K, Murphy B, Saunders J, Struthers S, Wang X, Williams J. A screening library for peptide activated G-protein coupled receptors. 1. The test set. J Med Chem 2004; 47: 6864-6874.
20. Balakin KV, Tkachenko SE, Lang SA, Okun I, Ivashchenko AA, Savchuk NP. Property-based design of GPCR-targeted library. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2002; 42: 1332-1342.
21. Balakin KV, Lang SA, Skorenko AV, Tkachenko SE, Ivashchenko AA, Savchuk NP. Structure-based versus property-based approaches in the design of G-protein-coupled receptor-targeted libraries. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2003; 43: 1553-1562.
22. Manallack DT, Pitt WR, Gancia E, Montana JG, Livingstone DJ, Ford MG, Whitley DC. Selecting screening candidates for kinase and G-protein coupled receptor targets using neural networks. J Chem Inf Comp Sci 2002; 42: 1256-1262.
23. Niwa T. Prediction of biological targets using probabilistic neural networks and atom-type descriptors. J Med Chem 2004; 47: 2645-2650.
24. Agrafiotis DK. Multiobjective optimization of combinatorial libraries. Mol Divers 2002; 5, 209-230.
25. Weinstein JN, Myers TG, O'Connor PM, Friend SH, Fornace AJ Jr., Kohn KW, Fojo T, Bates SE, Rubinstein LV, Anderson NL, Buolamwini JK, van Osdol WW, Monks AP, Scudiero DA, Sausville EA, Zaharevitz DW, Bunow B, Viswanadhan VN, Johnson GS, Wittes RE, Paull KD. An information-intensive approach to the molecular pharmacology of cancer. Science 1997; 275: 343-349.
26. Mestres J. Computational chemogenomics approaches to systematic knowledge -based drug discovery. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 2004; 7: 304-313.
27. Bredel M, Jacoby E. Chemogenomics: an emerging strategy for rapid target and drug discovery. Nat Rev Genet 2004; 5: 262-275.
28. Savchuk NP, Balakin KV, Tkachenko SE. Exploring the chemogenomic knowledge space with annotated chemical libraries. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2004; 8: 412-417.
29. Balakin KV, Tkachenko SE, Kiselyov AS, Savchuk NP. Focused chemistry from annotated libraries. Drug Discov Today 2006; 3: 397-403.
30. Blower PE, Yang C, Fligner MA, Verducci JS, Yu L, Richman S, Weinstein JN. Pharmacogenomic analysis: correlating molecular substructure classes with microarray gene expression data. Pharmacogenomics J 2002; 2: 259-271.
31. Rabow AA, Shoemaker RH, Sausville EA, Covell DG. Mining the National Cancer Institute's tumor-screening database: Identification of compounds with similar cellular activities. J Med Chem 2002; 45: 818-840.
32. Wallqvist A, Rabow AA, Shoemaker RH, Sausville EA, Covell DG. Establishing connections between microarray expression data and chemotherapeutic cancer pharmacology. Mol Cancer Ther 2002; 1: 311-320.
33. Rickardson L, Fryknäs M, Haglund C, Lövborg H, Nygren P, Gustafsson MG, Isaksson A, Larsson R. Screening of an annotated compound library for drug activity in a resistant myeloma cell line. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2006; 58: 749-758.
34. Root DE, Flaherty SP, Kelley BP, Stockwell BR. Biological mechanism profiling using an annotated compound library. Chem Biol 2003; 10: 881-892.
35. Klekota J, Brauner E, Roth FP, Schreiber SL. Using high-throughput screening data to discriminate compounds with single-target effects from those with side effects. J Chem Inf Model 2006; 46: 1549-1562.
36. Greenbaum DC, Arnold WD, Lu F, Hayrapetian L, Baruch A, Krumrine J, Toba S, Chehade K, Brömme D, Kuntz ID, Bogyo M. Small molecule affinity fingerprinting. A tool for enzyme family subclassification, target identification, and inhibitor design. Chem Biol 2002; 9: 1085-1094.
37. Vieth M, Higgs RE, Robertson DH, Shapiro M, Gragg EA, Hemmerle H. Kinomics-structural biology and chemogenomics of kinase inhibitors and targets. Biochim Biophys Acta 2004; 1697: 243-257.
38. Fabian MA, Biggs WH III, Treiber DK, Atteridge CE, Azimioara MD, Benedetti MG, Carter TA, Ciceri P, Edeen PT, Floyd M, Ford JM, Galvin M, Gerlach JL, Grotzfeld RM, Herrgard S, Insko DE, Insko MA, Lai AG, Lélias JM, Mehta SA, Milanov ZV, Velasco AM, Wodicka LM, Patel HK, Zarrinkar PP, Lockhart DJ. A small molecule-kinase interaction map for clinical kinase inhibitors. Nat Biotechnol 2005; 23: 329-236.
39. Cases M, García-Serna R, Hettne K, Weeber M, van der Lei J, Boyer S, Mestres J. Chemical and biological profiling of an annotated compound library directed to the nuclear receptor family. Curr Top Med Chem 2005; 5: 763-772.
40. Janzen WP, Hodge CN. A chemogenomic approach to discovering target-selective drugs. Chem Biol Drug Des 2006; 76: 85-86.
41. Balakin KV, Ivanenkov YA, Savchuk NP, Ivashchenko AA, Ekins S. Comprehensive computational assessment of ADME properties using mapping techniques. Curr Drug Discov Technol 2005; 2: 99-113.
42. Krejsa CM, Horvath D, Rogalski SL, Penzotti JE, Mao B, Barbosa F, Migeon JC. Predicting ADME properties and side effects: The BioPrint approach. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 2003; 6: 470-480.
43. Ganter B, Tugendreich S, Pearson CI, Ayanoglu E, Baumhueter S, Bostian KA, Brady L, Browne LJ, Calvin JT, Day GJ, Breckenridge N, Dunlea S, Eynon BP, Furness LM, Ferng J, Fielden MR, Fujimoto SY, Gong L, Hu C, Idury R, Judo MS, Kolaja KL, Lee MD, McSorley C, Minor JM, Nair RV, Natsoulis G, Nguyen P, Nicholson SM, Pham H, Roter AH, Sun D, Tan S, Thode S, Tolley AM, Vladimirova A, Yang J, Zhou Z, Jarnagin K. Development of a large-scale chemogenomics database to improve drug candidate selection and to understand mechanisms of chemical toxicity and action. J Biotechnol 2005; 119: 219-244.
44. Mao B, Gozalbes R, Barbosa F, Migeon J, Merrick S, Kamm K, Wong E, Costales C, Shi W, Wu C, Froloff N. QSAR modeling of in vitro inhibition of cytochrome P450 3A4. J Chem Inf Model 2006; 46: 2125-2134.
45. Horvath D, Jeandenans C. Neighborhood behavior of in silico structural spaces with respect to in vitro activity spaces-A novel understanding of the molecular similarity principle in the context of multiple receptor binding profiles. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2003; 43: 680-690.
46. Rolland C, Gozalbes R, Nicolaï E, Paugam MF, Coussy L, Barbosa F, Horvath D, Revah F. G-protein-coupled receptor affinity prediction based on the use of a profiling dataset: QSAR design, synthesis, and experimental validation. J Med Chem 2005; 48: 6563-6574.
47. Engelberg A. Iconix Pharmaceuticals, Inc.-Removing barriers to efficient drug discovery through chemogenomics. Pharmacogenomics 2004; 5: 741-744.
48. Olah M, Mracec M, Ostopovici L, Rad R, Bora A, Hadaruga N, Olah I, Banda M, Simon Z, Mracec M, Oprea TI. Chemoinformatics in Drug Discovery, pp. 223-239. New York: Wiley-VCH, 2004.
49. Nidhi, Glick M, Davies JW, Jenkins JL. Prediction of biological targets for compounds using multiple-category Bayesian models trained on chemogenomics databases. J Chem Inf Model 2006; 46: 1124-1133.
50. Nigsch F, Bender A, Jenkins JL, Mitchell JB. Ligand-target prediction using winnow and naive Bayesian algorithms and the implications of overall performance statistics. J Chem Inf Model 2008; 48:P 2313-P 2325.
51. Dubus E, Ijjaali I, Petitet F, Michel A. In silico classification of hERG channel blockers: A knowledge- based strategy. Chem Med Chem 2006; 1: 622-630.
52. Ijjaali I, Petitet F, Dubus E, Barberan O, Michel A. Assessing potency of c-Jun N-terminal kinase 3 (JNK3) inhibitors using 2D molecular descriptors and binary QSAR methodology. Bioorg Med Chem 2007; 15: 4256-4264.
53. Ijjaali I, Barrere C, Nargeot J, Petitet F, Bourinet E. Ligand-based virtual screening to identify new T-type calcium channel blockers. Channels (Austin) 2007; 1: 300-304.
54. Schürer SC, Tyagi P, Muskal SM. Prospective exploration of synthetically feasible, medicinal relevant chemical space. J Chem Inf Model 2005; 45: 239-248.
55. Rognan D. Chemogenomic approaches to rational drug design. Br J Pharmacol 2007; 152: 38-52.
56. Frye SV. Structure-activity relationship homology (SARAH): A conceptual framework for drug discovery in the genomic era. Chem Biol 1999; 6:R 3-R 7.
57. Schuffenhauer A, Zimmermann J, Stoop R, van der Vyver JJ, Lecchini S, Jacoby E. An ontology for pharmaceutical ligands and its application for in silic o screening and library design. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2002; 42: 947-955.
58. Schuffenhauer A, Floersheim P, Acklin P, Jacoby E. Similarity metrics for ligands reflecting the similarity of the target proteins. J Chem Inf Comp Sci 2003; 43: 391-405.
59. Crossley R. The design of screening libraries targeted at G-protein coupled receptors. Curr Top Med Chem 2004; 4: 581-588.
60. Jacoby E, Fauchere JL, Raimbaud E, Ollivier E, Michel A, Spedding M. A three binding site hypothesis for the interaction of ligands with monoamine G protein -coupled receptors: Implications for combinatorial ligand design. Quant Struct Activ Relat 1999; 18: 561-572.
61. Nordling E, Homan E. Generalization of a targeted library design protocol: Application to 5-HT7 receptor ligands. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004; 44: 2207-2215.
62. Bock JR, Gough DA. Virtual screen for ligands of orphan G protein-coupled receptors. J Chem Inf Model 2005; 45: 1402-1414.
63. Lapinsh M, Prusis P, Uhlén S, Wikberg JES. Improved approach for proteochemometrics modeling: application to organic compound-amine G protein-coupled receptor interactions. Bioinformatics 2005; 21: 4289-4296.
64. Jacob L, Hoffmann B, Stoven V, Vert JP. Virtual screening of GPCRs: an in silico chemogenomics approach. BMC Bioinformatics 2008; 9: 363.
65. Okuno Y, Yang J, Taneishi K, Yabuuchi H, Tsujimoto G. GLIDA: GPCR-ligand database for chemical genomic drug discovery. Nucleic Acids Res 2006; 34:D 673-D 677.
66. Todeschini R, Consonni V, Mannhold R, Kubinyi H, Timmerman H. Handbook of Molecular Descriptors. New York: Wiley, 2000.
67. Klabunde T. Chemogenomic approaches to ligand design. In: Ligand Design for G-Protein-Coupled Receptors, edited by D. Rognan, pp. 115-135. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH, 2006.
68. Zlotnik A, Yoshie O. Chemokines: A new classification system and their role in immunity. Immunity 2000; 12: 121-127.
69. Yoshie O, Imai T, Nomiyama H. Chemokines in immunity. Adv Immunol 2001; 78: 57-110.
70. Balakin KV, Ivanenkov YA, Tkachenko SE, Kiselyov AS, Ivachtchenko AV. Regulators of chemokine receptor activity as promising anticancer therapeutics. Curr Cancer Drug Targets 2008; 8: 299-340.
71. Allavena P, Marchesi F, Mantovani A. The role of chemokines and their receptors in tumor progression and invasion: potential new targets of biological therapy. Curr Cancer Ther Rev 2005; 1: 81-92.
72. Zlotnik A, Yoshie O, Nomiyama H. The chemokine and chemokine receptor superfamilies and their molecular evolution. Genome Biol 2006; 7: 243.
73. Pérez-Nueno VI, Ritchie DW, Rabal O, Pascual R, Borrell JI, Teixidó J. Comparison of ligand-based and receptor-based virtual screening of HIV entry inhibitors for the CXCR4 and CCR5 receptors using 3D ligand shape matching and ligand-receptor docking. J Chem Inf Model 2008; 48: 509-533.
74. Spencer EH. Development of a structure prediction method for G protein-coupled receptors. Thesis. California Institute of Technology, 2005.
75. Efremov R, Truong MJ, Darcissac EC, Zeng J, Grau O, Vergoten G, Debard C, Capron A, Bahr GM. Human chemokine receptors CCR5, CCR3 and CCR2B share common polarity motif in the first extracellular loop with other human G-protein coupled receptors. Eur J Biochem 2001; 263: 746-756.