Why QSAR fails: An empirical evaluation using conventional computational approach

Molecular Pharmaceutics

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 600-608

  Huang, Jianping ^a   Fan, Xiaohui ^a  

^a ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

combinatorial model; ensemble method; external validation; genetic algorithm; predictability; QSAR modeling; reliability; support vector machine

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; GENETIC ALGORITHM; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE; TETRAHYMENA PYRIFORMIS; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ALGORITHMS; COMBINATORIAL CHEMISTRY TECHNIQUES; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; ETHER-A-GO-GO POTASSIUM CHANNELS; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; TETRAHYMENA PYRIFORMIS; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 79953823573     PISSN: 15438384     EISSN: 15438392     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/mp100423u     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Tong, W.; Xie, Q.; Hong, H.; Shi, L.; Fang, H.; Perkins, R. Assessment of prediction confidence and domain extrapolation of two structure-activity relationship models for predicting estrogen receptor binding activity. Environ. Health Perspect. 2004, 112 (12), 1249.
2. Verma, J.; Khedkar, V.; Coutinho, E. 3D-QSAR in Drug Design-A Review. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2010, 10, 95-115.
3. Maggiora, G. On Outliers and Activity Cliffs - Why QSAR Often Disappoints. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46 (4), 1535.
4. Johnson, S. The trouble with QSAR (or how I learned to stop worrying and embrace fallacy). J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48 (1), 25-26.
5. Stouch, T.; Kenyon, J.; Johnson, S.; Chen, X.; Doweyko, A.; Li, Y. In silico ADME/Tox: why models fail. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17 (4), 83-92.
6. Doweyko, A. QSAR: dead or alive?. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2008, 22 (2), 81-89.
7. Polanski, J.; Bak, A.; Gieleciak, R.; Magdziarz, T. Modeling Robust QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46 (6), 2310-2318.
8. Scior, T.; Medina-Franco, J.; Do, Q.; Martínez-Mayorga, K.; Rojas, Y.; Bernard, P. How to Recognize and Workaround Pitfalls in QSAR Studies: A Critical Review. Curr. Med. Chem. 2009, 16 (32), 4297-4313.
9. Tetko, I.; Bruneau, P.; Mewes, H.; Rohrer, D.; Poda, G. Can we estimate the accuracy of ADME-Tox predictions?. Drug Discovery Today 2006, 11 (15-16), 700-707. (Pubitemid 44038632)
10. Zvinavashe, E.; Murk, A.; Rietjens, I. Promises and Pitfalls of Quantitative Structure- Activity Relationship Approaches for Predicting Metabolism and Toxicity. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2008, 21 (12), 2229-2236.
11. Golbraikh, A.; Tropsha, A. Beware of q2!. J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 2002, 20 (4), 269-276.
12. Gramatica, P. Principles of QSAR models validation: internal and external. QSAR Comb. Sci. 2007, 26 (5), 694-701.
13. Roy, P.; Leonard, J.; Roy, K. Exploring the impact of size of training sets for the development of predictive QSAR models. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2008, 90 (1), 31-42.
14. Li, Q.; Jørgensen, F.; Oprea, T.; Brunak, S.; Taboureau, O. hERG classification model based on a combination of support vector machine method and GRIND descriptors. Mol. Pharmaceutics 2008, 5 (1), 117-127.
15. Zhu, H.; Tropsha, A.; Fourches, D.; Varnek, A.; Papa, E.; Gramatica, P.; O berg, T.; Dao, P.; Cherkasov, A.; Tetko, I. Combinatorial QSAR modeling of chemical toxicants tested against Tetrahymena pyriformis. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48 (4), 766-784.
16. Talete SRL, DRAGON for Windows (Software for Molecular Descriptor Calculations). Version 5.4, 2006, http://www.talete.mi.it/.
17. Schultz, T.; Hewitt, M.; Netzeva, T.; Cronin, M. Assessing applicability domains of toxicological QSARs: definition, confidence in predicted values, and the role of mechanisms of action. QSAR Comb. Sci. 2007, 26 (2), 238-254.
18. Vapnik, V. The nature of statistical learning theory; Springer: 2000.
19. Chang, C.; Lin, C. LIBSVM: a library for support vectormachines. 2001, Software available at http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvm.
20. Hopfinger, A.; Patel, H. Application of genetic algorithms to the general QSAR problem and to guiding molecular diversity experiments; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, 1996.
21. Meffert, K.; Rotstan, N.; Knowles, C.; Sangiorgi, U. JGAP-Java Genetic Algorithms and Genetic Programming Package. URL: http://jgap.sourceforge.net/.
22. Hall, M.; Frank, E.; Holmes, G.; Pfahringer, B.; Reutemann, P.; Witten, I. The WEKA data mining software: An update. ACM SIGKDD Explorations 2009, 11 (1), 10-18.
23. Breiman, L. Random Forests. Mach. Learn. 2001, 45 (1), 5-32.
24. Hanley, J.; McNeil, B. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982, 143 (1), 29.
25. Sheridan, R. P. The Centroid Approximation for Mixtures: Calculating Similarity and Deriving Structure- Activity Relationships. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40 (6), 1456-1469.
26. Feher, M.; Ewing, T. Global or local QSAR: is there a way out? QSAR Comb. Sci. 2009, 28 (8), 850-855.
27. Eriksson, L.; Jaworska, J.; Worth, A.; Cronin, M.; McDowell, R.; Gramatica, P. Methods for reliability and uncertainty assessment and for applicability evaluations of classification-and regression-based QSARs. Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111 (10), 1361.
28. OECD Report from the Expert Group on (Q)SARs on Principles for the Validation of (Q)SARs. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/displaydocumentpdf? cote=env/jm/mono-(2004)24&doclanguage=en (Dec 10).
29. Huang, J.; Ma, G.; Muhammad, I.; Cheng, Y. Identifying P-glycoprotein substrates using a support vector machine optimized by a particle swarm. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47 (4), 1638-1647.
30. Kubinyi, H.; Hamprecht, F.; Mietzner, T. Three-Dimensional Quantitative Similarity- Activity Relationships (3D QSiAR) from SEAL Similarity Matrices. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41 (14), 2553-2564.
31. Wold, S.; Martens, H.; Wold, H. The multivariate calibration problem in chemistry solved by the PLS method. Matrix Pencils 1983, 286-293.
32. Yuan, H.; Wang, Y.; Cheng, Y. Local and Global Quantitative Structure- Activity Relationship Modeling and Prediction for the Baseline Toxicity. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47 (1), 159-169.
33. Shao, L.; Wu, L.; Fan, X.; Cheng, Y. Consensus Ranking Approach to Understanding the Underlying Mechanism With QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2010, 50 (11), 1941-1948.
34. Dietterich, T. Ensemble methods in machine learning. Mult. Classifier Syst. 2000, 1-15.
35. Dutta, D.; Guha, R.; Wild, D.; Chen, T. Ensemble feature selection: consistent descriptor subsets for multiple QSAR models. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47 (3), 989-997.
36. Agrafiotis, D.; Cedeno, W.; Lobanov, V. On the use of neural network ensembles in QSAR and QSPR. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42 (4), 903-911.
37. Merkwirth, C.; Mauser, H.; Schulz-Gasch, T.; Roche, O.; Stahl, M.; Lengauer, T. Ensemble methods for classification in cheminformatics. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44 (6), 1971-1978.
38. Sanchez-Martin, R.; Mittoo, S.; Bradley, M. The impact of combinatorial methodologies on medicinal chemistry. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2004, 4 (7), 653-669.
39. Wang, X.; Tang, H.; Golbraikh, A.; Tropsha, A. Combinatorial QSAR modeling of specificity and subtype selectivity of ligands binding to serotonin receptors 5HT1E and 5HT1F. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48 (5), 997-1013.