Similarity-based data mining in files of two-dimensional chemical structures using fingerprint measures of molecular resemblance

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 241-251

  Willett, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS; DATA FUSION; DATABASE SYSTEMS; K-MEANS CLUSTERING; MOLECULES; QUERY PROCESSING; STRUCTURE (COMPOSITION);

ASSOCIATION COEFFICIENT; BIOACTIVE MOLECULES; DATABASE CLUSTERING; FINGERPRINT REPRESENTATION; K-MEANS CLUSTERING METHOD; PROPERTY PREDICTIONS; SIMILARITY SEARCHING; TANIMOTO COEFFICIENT;

DATA MINING;

EID: 84861512073     PISSN: 19424787     EISSN: 19424795     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/widm.26     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Chen WL. Chemoinformatics: past, present and future. J Chem Inf Model 2006, 46:2230-2255.
2. Willett P. Chemoinformatics-a history. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 2011, 1.TBC.
3. Gasteiger J ed. Handbook of Chemoinformatics. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2003.
4. Leach AR, Gillet VJ. An Introduction to Chemoinformatics, 2nd ed. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 2007.
5. Eckert H, Bajorath J. Molecular similarity analysis in virtual screening: foundations, limitation and novel approaches. Drug Discov Today 2007, 12:225-233.
6. Sheridan RP. Chemical similarity searches. When is complexity justified? Expert Opin Drug Discov 2007, 2:423-430.
7. Willett P. Similarity methods in chemoinformatics. Annu Rev Inf Sci Technol 2009, 43:3-71.
8. Maggiora GM, Shanmugasundaram V. Molecular similarity measures. Methods Mol Biol 2010, 672:39-100.
9. Bender A. How similar are those molecules after all? Use two descriptors and you will have three different answers. Expert Opin Drug Discov 2010, 5:1141-1151.
10. Johnson MA, Maggiora GM, eds. Concepts and Applications of Molecular Similarity. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1990.
11. Wilkins CL, RandicM. A graph theoretical approach to structure-property and structure-activity correlation. Theoret Chim Acta 1980, 58:45-68.
12. Willett P, Winterman V. A comparison of some measures of inter-molecular structural similarity. Quant Struct-Activ Relat 1986, 5:18-25.
13. Brown RD, Martin YC. Use of structure-activity data to compare structure-based clustering methods and descriptors for use in compound selection. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1996, 36:572-584.
14. Martin YC, Kofron JL, Traphagen LM. Do structurally similar molecules have similar biological activities? J Med Chem 2002, 45:4350-4358.
15. He L, Jurs PC. Assessing the reliability of a QSAR model's predictions. J Mol Graph Model 2005, 23:503-523.
16. Sheridan RP, Feuston BP, Maiorov VN, Kearsley SK. Similarity to molecules in the training set is a good discriminator for prediction accuracy in QSAR. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004, 44:1912-1928.
17. Steffen A, Kogej T, Tyrchan C, Engkvist O. Comparison of molecular fingerprint methods on the basis of biological profile data. J Chem Inf Model 2009, 49:338-347.
18. Schuffenhauer A, Floersheim P, Acklin P, Jacoby E. Similarity metrics for ligands reflecting the similarity of the target proteins. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2003, 43:391-405.
19. Bostrom J, Hogner A, Schmitt S. Do structurally similar ligands bind in a similar fashion? J Med Chem 2006, 49:6716-6725.
20. Cleves AE, Jain AN. Robust ligand-based modeling of the biological targets of known drugs. J Med Chem 2006, 49:2921-2938.
21. Hert J, Keiser MJ, Irwin JJ, Oprea TI, Shoichet BK. Quantifying the relationship among drug classes. J Chem Inf Model 2008, 48:755-765.
22. Kubinyi H. Similarity and dissimilarity: a medicinal chemist's view. Perspect Drug Discov Des 1998, 9-11:225-232.
23. Nikolova N, Jaworska J. Approaches to measure chemical similarity-a review. Quant Struct-Activ Relat Comb Sci 2003, 22:1006-1026.
24. Raymond JW, Willett P. Maximum common subgraph isomorphism algorithms for the matching of chemical structures. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002, 16:521-533.
25. RareyM, Ehrlich H-C. Maximum common subgraph isomorphism algorithms and their applications in molecular science. A review. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 2011, 1:68-79.
26. Gillet VJ, Downs GM, Ling A, Lynch MF, Venkataram P, Wood JV, Dethlefsen W. Computerstorage 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.
27. Rarey M, Dixon JS. Feature trees: a new molecular similarity measure based on tree matching. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1998, 12:471-490.
28. Hert J, Willett P, Wilton DJ, Acklin P, Azzaoui K, Jacoby E, Schuffenhauer A. Comparison of topological descriptors for similarity-based virtual screening using multiple bioactive reference structures. Org Biomol Chem 2004, 2:3256-3266.
29. Sastry M, Lowrie JF, Dixon SL, Sherman W. Largescale systematic analysis of 2D fingerprint methods and parameters to improve virtual screening enrichments. J Chem Inf Model 2010, 50:771-748.
30. Bremser W. HOSE-a novel substructure code. Anal Chim Acta 1978, 103:355-365.
31. Attias R. DARC substructure search system: a new approach to chemical information. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1983, 23:102-108.
32. Willett P. A screen set generation algorithm. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1979, 19:159-162.
33. Bender A, Mussa HY, Glen RC, Reiling S. Molecular similarity searching using atom environments, information-based feature selection and a naive Bayesian classifier. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004, 44:170-178.
34. Rogers D, Hahn M. Extended-connectivity fingerprints. J Chem Inf Model 2010, 50:742-754.
35. Arif SM, Holliday JD, Willett P. Analysis and use of fragment occurrence data in similarity-based virtual screening. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2009, 23:655-668.
36. Arif SM, Holliday JD, PW. Inverse frequency weighting of fragments for similarity-based virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model 2010, 50:1340-1349.
37. Willett P, Barnard JM, Downs GM. Chemical similarity searching. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1998, 38:983-996.
38. Holliday JD, Hu C-Y, Willett P. Grouping of coefficients for the calculation of inter-molecular similarity and dissimilarity using 2D fragment bit-strings. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 2002, 5:155-166.
39. Rogers DJ, Tanimoto TT. A computer program for classifying plants. Science 1960, 1960:1115-1118.
40. Jaccard P. É tude comparative de la distribution florale dans une portion des Alpes et des Jura. Bulletin de la Socíeté Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles 1901, 37:547-579.
41. Sokal RR, Sneath PH. Principles of Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman; 1963.
42. Gower JC. Measures of similarity, dissimilarity and distance. In. Encyclopaedia of Statistical Sciences. Edited by Kotz S, Johnson NL, Read CB. Chichester: John Wiley&Sons; 1982. 397-405.
43. Willett P, Winterman V, Bawden D. Implementation of nearest-neighbour searching in an online chemical structure search system. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1986, 26:36-41.
44. Flower DR. On the properties of bit string based measures of chemical similarity. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1988, 38:379-386.
45. Fligner MA, Verducci JS, Blower PE. A modification of the Jaccard-Tanimoto similarity index for diverse selection of chemical compounds using binary strings. Technometrics 2002, 44:110-119.
46. Willett P. Similarity-based virtual screening using 2D fingerprints. Drug Discov Today 2006, 11:1046-1053.
47. Carhart RE, Smith DH, Venkataraghavan R. Atom pairs as molecular-features in structure activity studies-definition and applications. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1985, 25:64-73.
48. Geppert H, Vogt M, Bajorath J. Current trends in ligand-based virtual screening. molecular representations, data mining methods, new application areas, and performance evaluation. J Chem Inf Model 2010, 50:205-216.
49. Sheridan RP, Kearsley SK. Why do we need so many chemical similarity search methods? Drug Discov Today 2002, 7:903-911.
50. Willett P. Data fusion in ligand-based virtual screening. QSAR Comb Sci 2006, 25:1143-1152.
51. Williams C. Reverse fingerprinting, similarity searching by group fusion and fingerprint bit importance. Mol Divers 2006, 10:311-332.
52. Chen B, Mueller C, Willett P. Combination rules for group fusion in similarity-based virtual screening. Mol Inform 2010, 29:533-541.
53. Whittle M, Gillet VJ, Willett P, Loesel J. Analysis of data fusion methods in virtual screening: theoretical model. J Chem Inf Model 2006, 46:2193-2205.
54. Brown N, Jacoby E. On scaffolds and hopping in medicinal chemistry. Mini Rev Med Chem 2006, 6:1217-1229.
55. Vogt M, Stumpfe D, Geppert H, Bajorath J. Scaffold hopping using two-dimensional fingerprints: true potential, black magic, or a hopeless endeavor? Guidelines for virtual screening. J Med Chem 2010, 53:5707-5715.
56. Klebe G, ed. Virtual Screening. an Alternative or Complement to High Throughput Screening. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 2000.
57. Böhm H-J, Schneider G (eds. Virtual Screening for Bioactive Molecules. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2000.
58. Stahura FL, Bajorath J. Virtual screening methods that complement high-throughput screening. Comb Chem High-Throughput Screen 2004, 7:259-269.
59. Oprea TI, Matter H. Integrating virtual screening in lead discovery. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2004, 8:349-358.
60. Alvarez J, Shoichet B (eds. Virtual Screening in Drug Discovery. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2005.
61. Abdo A, Salim N. Similarity-based virtual screening with a Bayesian inference network. Chem Med Chem 2009, 4:210-218.
62. Muchmore SW, Debe DA, Metz JT, Brown SP, Martin YC, Hajduk PJ. Application of belief theory to similarity data fusion for use in analog searching and lead hopping. J Chem Inf Model 2008, 48:941-948.
63. Leach AR, Gillet VJ, Lewis RA, Taylor R. 3D pharmacophore methods in drug discovery. J Med Chem 2010, 53:539-558.
64. Goldman BB, Walters WP. Machine learning in computational chemistry. Annu Rep Comput Chem 2006, 2:127-140.
65. Warren GL, Andrews CW, Capelli AM, Clarke B, LaLonde J, Lambert MH, Lindvall M, Nevins N, Semus SF, Senger S et al. A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. JMed Chem 2006, 49:5912-5931.
66. Sneath PHA, Sokal RR. Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman; 1973.
67. Everitt BS, Landau S, Leese M. Cluster Analysis. 4th ed. London: Edward Arnold; 2001.
68. Downs GM, Barnard JM. Clustering methods and their uses in computational chemistry. Rev Comput Chem 2002, 18:1-40.
69. Willett P, Winterman V, Bawden D. Implementation of non-hierarchic cluster analysismethods in chemical information systems: selection of compounds for biological testing and clustering of substructure search output. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1986, 26:109-118.
70. Nouwen J, Hansen B. An investigation of clustering as a tool in Quant Structure-Activity Relationships (QSAR). SAR QSAR Environ Res 1995, 4:1-10.
71. Shemetulskis NE, Dunbar JB, Dunbar BW, Moreland DW, Humblet C. Enhancing the diversity of a corporate database using chemical database clustering and analysis. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1995, 9:407-416.
72. Willett P. Similarity and Clustering in Chemical Information Systems. Letchworth: Research Studies Press; 1987.
73. Ward JH. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc 1963, 58:236-244.
74. Jarvis RA, Patrick EA. Clustering using a similarity measure based on shared nearest neighbours. IEEE Trans Comput 1973, C-22:1025-1034.
75. Downs GM, Willett P, Fisanick W. Similarity searching and clustering of chemical-structure databases using molecular property data. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1994, 34:1094-1102.
76. Steinbach M, Karypis G, Kumar VA. Comparison of Document Clustering Techniques. Technical report TR 00-034. Department Computer Science&Engineering, University of Minnesota; 2000.
77. Boecker A, Derksen S, Schmidt E, Teckentrup A, Schneider G. A hierarchical clustering approach for large compound libraries. J Chem Inf Model 2005, 45:807-815.
78. Schuffenhauer A, Brown N, Ertl P, Jenkins JL, Selzer P, Hamon J. Clustering and rule-based classifications of chemical structures evaluated in the biological activity space. J Chem Inf Model 2007, 47:325-336.
79. Engels MFM, Gibbs AC, Jaeger EP, Verbinnen D, Lobanov VS, Agrafiotis DK. A cluster-based strategy for assessing the overlap between large chemical libraries and its application to a recent acquisition. J Chem Inf Model 2006, 46:2651-2660.
80. Patterson DE, Cramer RD, Ferguson AM, Clark RD, Weinberger LE. Neighbourhood behaviour: a useful concept for validation of "Mol Divers" descriptors. J Med Chem 1996, 39:3049-3059.
81. Dean PM, Lewis RA, eds. Molecular Diversity in Drug Design. Amsterdam: Kluwer; 1999.
82. Lewis RA, Pickett SD, Clark DE. Computer-aided molecular diversity analysis and combinatorial library design. Rev Comput Chem 2000, 16:1-51.
83. Maldonado AG, Doucet JP, Petitjean M, Fan B-T. Molecular similarity and diversity in chemoinformatics: from theory to applications. Mol Divers 2006, 10:39-79.
84. LajinessMS. Dissimilarity-based compound selection techniques. Perspect Drug Discov Des 1997, 7/8:65-84.
85. Hudson BD, Hyde RM, Rahr E, Wood J. Parameter basedmethods for compound selection from chemical databases. Quant Struct Activ Relat 1996, 15:285-289.
86. Pearlman RS, Smith KM. Novel software tools for chemical diversity. Perspect Drug Discov Des 1998, 9-11:339-353.
87. Snarey M, Terrett NK, Willett P, Wilton DJ. Comparison of algorithms for dissimilarity-based compound selection. J Mol Graph Model 1997, 15:372-385.
88. Brown RD, Martin YC. Designing combinatorial librarymixtures using a genetic algorithm. JMed Chem 1997, 40:2304-2313.
89. Sheridan RP, Kearsley SK. Using a genetic algorithm to suggest combinatorial libraries. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1995, 35:310-320.
90. Hassan M, Bielawski JP, Hempel JC, Waldman M. Optimization and visualization of molecular diversity of combinatorial libraries. MolDivers 1996, 2:64-74.
91. Good AC, Lewis RA. New methodology for profiling combinatorial libraries and screening sets. cleaning up the design with HARPick. J Med Chem 1997, 40:3926-3936.
92. Waldman M, Li H, Hassan M. Novel algorithms for the optimization of molecular diversity of combinatorial libraries. J Mol Graph Model 2000, 18:412-426.
93. Agrafiotis DK. Multiobjective optimization of combinatorial libraries. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002, 16:335-356.
94. Brown RD, Hassan M, Waldman M. Combinatorial library design for diversity, cost efficiency and druglike character. J Mol Graph Model 2000, 18:427-437.
95. Gillet VJ. Designing combinatorial libraries optimized on multiple objectives. Methods Mol Biol 2004, 275:335-354.
96. Clark DE, Pickett SD. Computational methods for the prediction of 'drug-likeness'. Drug Discov Today 2000, 5:49-58.
97. Oprea TI. Property distribution of drug-related chemical databases. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2000, 14:251-264.
98. Raymond JW, Willett P. Effectiveness of graph-based and fingerprint-based similarity measures for virtual screening of 2D chemical structure databases. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2002, 16:59-71.
99. Raymond JW, Blankley CJ, Willett P. Comparison of chemical clustering methods using graph-based and fingerprint-based similarity measures. J Mol Graph Model 2003, 21:421-433.
100. Fisanick W, Cross KP, Rusinko A. Similarity searching on CAS Registry substances. 1. Global molecular property and generic atom triangle geometric searching. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1992, 32:664-674.
101. Mason JS, Morize I, Menard PR, Cheney DL, Hulme C, Labaudiniere RF. New 4-point pharmacophore method for molecular similarity and diversity applications. Overview of the method and applications, including a novel approach to the design of combinatorial libraries containing privileged substructures. J Med Chem 1999, 42:3251-3264.
102. Ballester PJ, Richards WG. Ultrafast shape recognition to search compound databases for similar molecular shapes. J Comput Chem 2007, 28:1711-1723.
103. Hawkins PDC, Skillman AG, Nicholls A. Comparison of shape-matching and docking as virtual screening tools. J Med Chem 2007, 50:74-82.
104. Mestres J, Rohrer DC, Maggiora GM. MIMIC: a molecular-field matching program. Exploiting applicability of molecular similarity approaches. J Comput Chem 1997, 18:934-954.
105. Cheeseright T, Mackey M, Rose S, Vinter A. Molecular field extrema as descriptors of biological activity: definition and validation. J Chem Inf Model 2006, 46:6650-6676.
106. McGaughey GB, Sheridan RP, Bayly CI, Culberson JC, Kreatsoulas C, Lindsley S, Maiorov V, Truchon J-F, Cornell WD. Comparison of topological, shape, and docking methods in virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model 2007, 47:1504-1519.