Structure-based virtual screening

In silico Lead Discovery

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 20-46

  Sperandio, Olivier ^a   Villoutreix, Bruno O ^a   Miteva, Maria A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84876841638     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.2174/978160805142711101010020     Document Type: Chapter

References (225)

1. Ertl, P. Cheminformatics analysis of organic substituents: Identification of the most common substituents, calculation of substituent properties, and automatic identification of drug-like bioisosteric groups. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 374-380.
2. Davies, J.W.; Glick, M.; Jenkins, J.L. Streamlining lead discovery by aligning in silico and high-throughput screening. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2006 10, 343-351.
3. Lyne, P.D. Structure-based virtual screening: An overview. Drug Discov. Today 2002, 7, 1047-1055.
4. Shoichet, B.K. Virtual screening of chemical libraries. Nature 2004, 432, 862-865.
5. Kubinyi, H. Drug research: Myths, hype and reality. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 665-668.
6. Lundqvist, T. The devil is still in the details-driving early drug discovery forward with biophysical experimental methods. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 2005, 8, 513-519.
7. Alvarez, J.C. High-throughput docking as a source of novel drug leads. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004, 8, 365-370.
8. Ekins, S.; Mestres, J.; Testa, B. In silico pharmacology for drug discovery: Applications to targets and beyond. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2007, 152, 21-37.
9. Clark, D. What has virtual screening ever done for drug discovery? Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 2008, 3, 841-851.
10. Miteva, M. Hierarchical structure-based virtual screening for drug design Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Eq. 2008, 22, 634-638.
11. Sperandio, O.; Miteva, M.A.; Segers, K.; Nicolaes, G.; Villoutreix, B.O. Screening outside the catalytic site: Inhibition of macromolecular interactions through structure-based virtual ligand screening experiments. The Open Biochemistry Journal 2008, 2, 29-37.
12. Altman, M.D.; Ali, A.; Reddy, G.S.; Nalam, M.N.; Anjum, S.G.; Cao, H.; Chellappan, S.; Kairys, V.; Fernandes, M.X.; Gilson, M.K.; Schiffer, C.A.; Rana, T.M.; Tidor, B. HIV-1 protease inhibitors from inverse design in the substrate envelope exhibit subnanomolar binding to drug-resistant variants. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 6099-6113.
13. Villoutreix, B.O.; Eudes, R.; Miteva, M.A. Structure-based virtual ligand screening: Recent success stories. Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening 2009, 12, 1000-1016.
14. Kuntz, I.D. Structure-based strategies for drug design and discovery. Science 1992, 257, 1078-1082.
15. Prathipati, P.; Dixit, A.; Saxena, A.K. Computer-aided drug design: Integration of structure-based and ligand-based approaches in drug design. Curr. Comp. Aided Drug Design 2007, 3, 341-352.
16. Radestock, S.; Weil, T.; Renner, S. Homology model-based virtual screening for gpcr ligands using docking and targetbiased scoring. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1104-1117.
17. Bajorath, J. Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2002, 1, 882-894.
18. Lengauer, T.; Lemmen, C.; Rarey, M.; Zimmermann, M. Novel technologies for virtual screening. Drug Discov. Today 2004, 9, 27-34.
19. Stahura, F.L.; Bajorath, J. New methodologies for ligand-based virtual screening. Curr. Pharm. De.s 2005, 11, 1189-1202.
20. Auer, J.; Bajorath, J. Molecular similarity concepts and search calculations. Methods Mol. Biol. 2008, 453, 327-347.
21. Douguet, D. Ligand-based approaches in virtual screening. Curr. Comp. Aided Drug Design 2008, 4, 180-190.
22. Cummings, M.D.; DesJarlais, R.L.; Gibbs, A.C.; Mohan, V.; Jaeger, E.P. Comparison of automated docking programs as virtual screening tools. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 962-976.
23. Schneidman-Duhovny, D.; Nussinov, R.; Wolfson, H.J. Predicting molecular interactions in silico: II. Protein-protein and protein-drug docking. Curr. Med. Chem. 2004, 11, 91-107.
24. Sperandio, O.; Miteva, M.A.; Delfaud, F.; Villoutreix, B.O. Receptor-based computational screening of compound databases: The main docking-scoring engines. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 2006, 7, 369-393.
25. Zhou, Z.; Felts, A.K.; Friesner, R.A.; Levy, R.M. Comparative performance of several flexible docking programs and scoring functions: Enrichment studies for a diverse set of pharmaceutically relevant targets. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1599-1608.
26. Rockey, W.M.; Elcock, A.H. Progress toward virtual screening for drug side effects. Proteins 2002, 48, 664-671.
27. Evers, A.; Klebe, G. Successful virtual screening for a submicromolar antagonist of the neurokinin-1 receptor based on a ligand-supported homology model. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 5381-5392.
28. Kairys, V.; Fernandes, M.X.; Gilson, M.K. Screening drug-like compounds by docking to homology models: A systematic study. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 365-379.
29. Mohan, V.; Gibbs, A.C.; Cummings, M.D.; Jaeger, E.P.; DesJarlais, R.L. Docking: Successes and challenges. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2005, 11, 323-333.
30. Kitchen, D.B.; Decornez, H.; Furr, J.R.; Bajorath, J. Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: Methods and applications. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2004, 3, 935-949.
31. Cavasotto, C.N.; Orry, A.J. Ligand docking and structure-based virtual screening in drug discovery. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2007, 7, 1015-1023.
32. Geldenhuys, W.J.; Gaasch, K.E.; Watson, M.; Allen, D.D.; Van der Schyf, C.J. Optimizing the use of open-source software applications in drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 2006, 11, 127-132.
33. Leach, A.R.; Shoichet, B.K.; Peishoff, C.E. Prediction of protein-ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: Successes and gaps. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 5851-5855.
34. Krovat, E.M.; Steindl, T.; Langer, T. Recent advances in docking and scoring. Current Computer-Aided Drug Design 2005, 1, 93-102.
35. Villoutreix, B.O.; Renault, N.; Lagorce, D.; Sperandio, O.; Montes, M.; Miteva, M.A. Free resources to assist structurebased virtual ligand screening experiments. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 2007, 8, 381-411.
36. Kroemer, R.T. Structure-based drug design: Docking and scoring Curr. Prot. Peptide Sci. 2007, 8, 312-328.
37. Moitessier, N.; Englebienne, P.; Lee, D.; Lawandi, J.; Corbeil, C.R. Towards the development of universal, fast and highly accurate docking/scoring methods: A long way to go. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2008, 153, S7-26.
38. Miteva, M.A.; Sperandio, O.; Villoutreix, B.O. Virtual ligand screening for structure-based drug design: Approaches and progress. Bioautomation 2007, 7, 104-121.
39. Taylor, R.D.; Jewsbury, P.J.; Essex, J.W. A review of protein-small molecule docking methods. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16, 151-166.
40. Alonso, H.; Bliznyuk, A.A.; Gready, J.E. Combining docking and molecular dynamic simulations in drug design. Med. Res. Rev. 2006, 26, 531-568.
41. Brooijmans, N.; Kuntz, I.D. Molecular recognition and docking algorithms. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 2003, 32, 335-373.
42. Mobley, D.L.; Dill, K.A. Binding of small-molecule ligands to proteins: "What you see" Is not always "What you get". Structure 2009, 17, 489-498.
43. Aqvist, J.; Medina, C.; Samuelsson, J.E. A new method for predicting binding affinity in computer-aided drug design. Protein Eng. 1994, 7, 385-391.
44. Jain, A.N. Scoring functions for protein-ligand docking. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci 2006, 7, 407-420.
45. Meng, E.C.; Shoichet, B.K.; Kuntz, I.D. Automated docking with grid-based energy evaluation. J. Comput. Chem. 1992, 13, 505-524.
46. Goodsell, D.S.; Olson, A.J. Automated docking of substrates to proteins by simulated annealing. Proteins 1990, 8, 195-202.
47. Shoichet, B.K.; Leach, A.R.; Kuntz, I.D. Ligand solvation in molecular docking. Proteins 1999, 34, 4-16.
48. Zou, X.; Sun, Y.; Kuntz, I.D. Inclusion of solvation in ligand binding free energy calculations using the generalized-born model J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 8033-8043.
49. Wang, J.; Morin, P.; Wang, W.; Kollman, P.A. Use of MM-PBSA in reproducing the binding free energies to HIV-1 RT of TIBO derivatives and predicting the binding mode to HIV-1 RT of efavirenz by docking and MM-PBSA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 5221-5230.
50. Yoon, S.; Welsh, W.J. Identification of a minimal subset of receptor conformations for improved multiple conformation docking and two-step scoring J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 88-96.
51. Lyne, P.D.; Lamb, M.L.; Saeh, J.C. Accurate prediction of the relative potencies of members of a series of kinase inhibitors using molecular docking and MM-GBSA scoring. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 4805-4808.
52. Ferrari, A.M.; Degliesposti, G.; Sgobba, M.; Rastelli, G. Validation of an automated procedure for the prediction of relative free energies of binding on a set of aldose reductase inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2007, 15, 7865-7877.
53. Graves, A.P.; Shivakumar, D.M.; Boyce, S.E.; Jacobson, M.P.; Case, D.A.; Shoichet, B.K. Rescoring docking hit lists for model cavity sites: Predictions and experimental testing. J. Mol. Biol. 2008, 377, 914-934.
54. Wang, J.; Kang, X.; Kuntz, I.D.; Kollman, P.A. Hierarchical database screenings for HIV-1 reverse transcriptase using a pharmacophore model, rigid docking, solvation docking, and MM-PB/SA. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 2432-2444.
55. Michel, J.; Verdonk, M.L.; Essex, J.W. Protein-ligand binding affinity predictions by implicit solvent simulations: A tool for lead optimization? J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 7427-7439.
56. Steinbrecher, T.; Case, D.A.; Labahn, A. A multistep approach to structure-based drug design: Studying ligand binding at the human neutrophil elastase. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 1837-1844.
57. Friesner, R.A.; Murphy, R.B.; Repasky, M.P.; Frye, L.L.; Greenwood, J.R.; Halgren, T.A.; Sanschagrin, P.C.; Mainz, D.T. Extra precision glide: Docking and scoring incorporating a model of hydrophobic enclosure for protein-ligand complexes. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 6177-6196.
58. Kulharia, M.; Goody, R.S.; Jackson, R.M. Information theory-based scoring function for the structure-based prediction of protein-ligand binding affinity. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1990-1998.
59. Bohm, H.J. The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1994, 8, 243-256.
60. Weng, Z.; Vajda, S.; Delisi, C. Prediction of protein complexes using empirical free energy functions. Protein Sci. 1996, 5, 614-626.
61. Schulz-Gasch, T.; Stah, M. Scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions: A critical perspective. Drug Discovery Today: Technologies 2004, 1, 231-239.
62. de Azevedo, W.F., Jr.; Dias, R. Evaluation of ligand-binding affinity using polynomial empirical scoring functions. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2008, 16, 9378-9382.
63. Raub, S.; Steffen, A.; Kamper, A.; Marian, C.M. AIscore chemically diverse empirical scoring function employing quantum chemical binding energies of hydrogen-bonded complexes. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1492-1510.
64. Wang, B.; Westerhoff, L.M.; Merz, K.M., Jr. A critical assessment of the performance of protein-ligand scoring functions based on NMR chemical shift perturbations. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 5128-5134.
65. Wallqvist, A.; Jernigan, R.L.; Covell, D.G. A preference-based free-energy parameterization of enzyme-inhibitor binding. Applications to HIV-1-protease inhibitor design. Protein Sci. 1995, 4, 1881-1903.
66. Huang, S.Y.; Zou, X. An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: Ii. Validation of the scoring function. J. Comput. Chem. 2006, 27, 1876-1882.
67. Dominy, B.N.; Shakhnovich, E.I. Native atom types for knowledge-based potentials: Application to binding energy prediction. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 4538-4558.
68. Baroni, M.; Cruciani, G.; Sciabola, S.; Perruccio, F.; Mason, J.S. 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. Marcou, G.; Rognan, D. Optimizing fragment and scaffold docking by use of molecular interaction fingerprints. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 195-207.
70. Seifert, M.H. Targeted scoring functions for virtual screening. Drug Discov. Today 2009, 14, 562-569.
71. Seifert, M.H. Optimizing the signal-to-noise ratio of scoring functions for protein-ligand docking. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 602-612.
72. Kuntz, I.D.; Blaney, J.M.; Oatley, S.J.; Langridge, R.; Ferrin, T.E. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 1982, 161, 269-288.
73. McGann, M.R.; Almond, H.R.; Nicholls, A.; Grant, J.A.; Brown, F.K. Gaussian docking functions. Biopolymers 2003, 68, 76-90.
74. Vigers, G.P.; Rizzi, J.P. Multiple active site corrections for docking and virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 80-89.
75. Miller, M.D.; Kearsley, S.K.; Underwood, D.J.; Sheridan, R.P. Flog: A system to select 'quasi-flexible' ligands complementary to a receptor of known three-dimensional structure. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1994, 8, 153-174.
76. Lawrence, M.C.; Davis, P.C. Clix: A search algorithm for finding novel ligands capable of binding proteins of known three-dimensional structure. Proteins 1992, 12, 31-41.
77. Pang, Y.P.; Perola, E.; Xu, K.; Prendergast, F.G. Eudoc: A computer program for identification of drug interaction sites in macromolecules and drug leads from chemical databases. J. Comput. Chem. 2001, 22, 1750-1771.
78. Mozziconacci, J.C.; Arnoult, E.; Bernard, P.; Do, Q.T.; Marot, C.; Morin-Allory, L. Optimization and validation of a docking-scoring protocol; application to virtual screening for COX-2 inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 1055-1068.
79. Miteva, M.A.; Lee, W.H.; Montes, M.O.; Villoutreix, B.O. Fast structure-based virtual ligand screening combining FRED, DOCK, and Surflex. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 6012-6022.
80. Lorber, D.M.; Shoichet, B.K. Flexible ligand docking using conformational ensembles. Protein Sci. 1998, 7, 938-950.
81. Lorber, D.M.; Shoichet, B.K. Hierarchical docking of databases of multiple ligand conformations. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2005, 5, 739-749.
82. Sauton, N.; Lagorce, D.; Villoutreix, B.O.; Miteva, M.A. MS-DOCK: Accurate multiple conformation generator and rigid docking protocol for multi-step virtual ligand screening. BMC Bioinformatics 2008, 9, 184.
83. Moustakas, D.T.; Lang, P.T.; Pegg, S.; Pettersen, E.; Kuntz, I.D.; Brooijmans, N.; Rizzo, R.C. Development and validation of a modular, extensible docking program: DOCK 5. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 2006, 20, 601-619.
84. Kirchmair, J.; Wolber, G.; Laggner, C.; Langer, T. Comparative performance assessment of the conformational model generators omega and catalyst: A large-scale survey on the retrieval of protein-bound ligand conformations. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 1848-1861.
85. Sperandio, O.; Souaille, M.; Delfaud, F.; Miteva, M.A.; Villoutreix, B.O. MED-3DMC: A new tool to generate 3D conformation ensembles of small molecules with a Monte Carlo sampling of the conformational space. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2009, 44, 1405-1409.
86. Leite, T.B.; Gomes, D.; Miteva, M.A.; Chomilier, J.; Villoutreix, B.O.; Tuffery, P. Frog: A free online drug 3D conformation generator. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007, 35, W568-572.
87. Vainio, M.J.; Johnson, M.S. Generating conformer ensembles using a multiobjective genetic algorithm. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 2462-2474.
88. Lagorce, D.; Pencheva, T.; Villoutreix, B.O.; Miteva, M.A. DG-AMMOS: A new tool to generate 3D conformation of small molecules using Distance Geometry and Automated Molecular Mechanics Optimization for in silico Screening. BMC Chem. Biol. 2009, 9, 6.
89. Makino, S.; Kuntz, I.D. Automated flexible ligand docking method and its application for database search J. Comput. Chem. 1997, 18, 1812-1825.
90. Grant, J.A.; Pickup, B.T.; Nicholls, A. A smooth permittivity function for Poisson-Boltzmann solvation methods. J. Comp. Chem. 2001, 22, 608-640.
91. Fradera, X.; Knegtel, R.M.; Mestres, J. Similarity-driven flexible ligand docking. Proteins 2000, 40, 623-636.
92. Joseph-McCarthy, D.; Thomas, B.E. t.; Belmarsh, M.; Moustakas, D.; Alvarez, J.C. Pharmacophore-based molecular docking to account for ligand flexibility. Proteins 2003, 51, 172-188.
93. Jain, A.N. Surflex: Fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 499-511.
94. Jain, A.N. Surflex-dock 2.1: Robust performance from ligand energetic modeling, ring flexibility, and knowledge-based search. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2007, 21, 281-306.
95. Welch, W.; Ruppert, J.; Jain, A.N. Hammerhead: Fast, fully automated docking of flexible ligands to protein binding sites. Chem. Biol. 1996, 3, 449-462.
96. Rarey, M.; Kramer, B.; Lengauer, T.; Klebe, G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J. Mol. Biol. 1996, 261, 470-489.
97. Bohm, H.J. The computer program ludi: A new method for the de novo design of enzyme inhibitors. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1992, 6, 61-78.
98. Klebe, G.; Mietzner, T. A fast and efficient method to generate biologically relevant conformations. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1994, 8, 583-606.
99. Zsoldos, Z.; Reid, D.; Simon, A.; Sadjad, B. S.; Johnson, A.P. Ehits: An innovative approach to the docking and scoring function problems. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 2006, 7, 421-435.
100. Venkatachalam, C.M.; Jiang, X.; Oldfield, T.; Waldman, M. Ligandfit: A novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2003, 21, 289-307.
101. Krammer, A.; Kirchhoff, P.D.; Jiang, X.; Venkatachalam, C.M.; Waldman, M. Ligscore: A novel scoring function for predicting binding affinities. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2005, 23, 395-407.
102. Verkhivker, G.M.; Rejto, P.A.; Bouzida, D.; Arthurs, S.; Colson, A.B.; Freer, S.T.; Gehlhaar, D.K.; Larson, V.; Luty, B.A.; Marrone, T.; Rose, P.W. Towards understanding the mechanisms of molecular recognition by computer simulations of ligand-protein interactions. J. Mol. Recognit. 1999, 12, 371-389.
103. Liu, M.; Wang, S. Mcdock: A Monte Carlo simulation approach to the molecular docking problem. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1999, 13, 435-451.
104. Hart, T.N.; Ness, S.R.; Read, R.J. Critical evaluation of the research docking program for the CASP2 challenge. Proteins 1997, Suppl 1, 205-209.
105. McMartin, C.; Bohacek, R.S. Qxp: Powerful, rapid computer algorithms for structure-based drug design. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 333-344.
106. Todorov, N.P.; Alberts, I.L.; Esch, I.J.; Dean, P.M. QUASI: A novel method for simultaneous superposition of multiple flexible ligands and virtual screening using partial similarity. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1007-1020.
107. Tietze, S.; Apostolakis, J. GlamDock: Development and validation of a new docking tool on several thousand proteinligand complexes. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1657-1672.
108. Jones, G.; Willett, P.; Glen, R.C.; Leach, A.R.; Taylor, R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J. Mol. Biol. 1997, 267, 727-748.
109. Taylor, J.S.; Burnett, R.M. Darwin: A program for docking flexible molecules. Proteins 2000, 41, 173-191.
110. Cecchini, M.; Kolb, P.; Majeux, N.; Caflisch, A. Automated docking of highly flexible ligands by genetic algorithms: A critical assessment J. Comput. Chem. 2004, 25, 412-422.
111. Morris, G.; Goodsell, D.S.; Halliday, R.S.; Huey, R.; Hart, W.E.; Belew, R. K.; Olson, A.J. Automated docking using a lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. J. Comput. Chem. 1999, 19, 1639-1662.
112. Vaque, M.; Arola, A.; Aliagas, C.; Pujadas, G. BDT: An easy-to-use front-end application for automation of massive docking tasks and complex docking strategies with AutoDock. Bioinformatics 2006, 22, 1803-1804.
113. Zhang, S.; Kumar, K.; Jiang, X.; Wallqvist, A.; Reifman, J. DOVIS: An implementation for high-throughput virtual screening using AutoDock. BMC Bioinformatics 2008, 9, 126.
114. Trott, O.; Olson, A.J. AutoDock Vina: Improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. J. Comput. Chem. 2010, 31, 455-461.
115. Namasivayam, V.; Günther, R. PSO&AUTODOCK: A fast flexible molecular docking program based on swarm intelligence. Chem. Biol. Drug Des. 2007, 70, 475-484.
116. Stroganov, O.V.; Novikov, F.N.; Stroylov, V.S.; Kulkov, V.; Chilov, G.G. Lead Finder: An approach to improve accuracy of protein-ligand docking, binding energy estimation, and virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 2371-2385.
117. Baxter, C.A.; Murray, C.W.; Clark, D.E.; Westhead, D.R.; Eldridge, M.D. Flexible docking using tabu search and an empirical estimate of binding affinity. Proteins 1998, 33, 367-382.
118. Pei, J.; Wang, Q.; Liu, Z.; Li, Q.; Yang, K.; Lai, L. PSI-DOCK: Towards highly efficient and accurate flexible ligand docking. Proteins 2006, 62, 934-946.
119. Gorelik, B.; Goldblum, A. High quality binding modes in docking ligands to proteins. Proteins 2008, 71, 1373-1386.
120. Korb, O.; Stutzle, T.; Exner, T.E. PLANTS: Application of ant colony optimization to structure-based drug design. 2006; ANTS LNCS 4150, pp. 247-258.
121. Erickson, J.A.; Jalaie, M.; Robertson, D.H.; Lewis, R.A.; Vieth, M. Lessons in molecular recognition: The effects of ligand and protein flexibility on molecular docking accuracy. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 45-55.
122. Sivanesan, D.; Rajnarayanan, R.V.; Doherty, J.; Pattabiraman, N. In-silico screening using flexible ligand binding pockets: A molecular dynamics-based approach. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2005, 19, 213-228.
123. Bolstad, E.S.; Anderson, A.C. In pursuit of virtual lead optimization: Pruning ensembles of receptor structures for increased efficiency and accuracy during docking. Proteins 2009, 75, 62-74.
124. Wu, G.; Vieth, M. Sdocker: A method utilizing existing x-ray structures to improve docking accuracy. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 3142-3148.
125. Kuhn, B.; Gerber, P.; Schulz-Gasch, T.; Stahl, M. Validation and use of the MM-PBSA approach for drug discovery. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 4040-4048.
126. Khandelwal, A.; Lukacova, V.; Comez, D.; Kroll, D.M.; Raha, S.; Balaz, S. A combination of docking, QM/MM methods, and MD simulation for binding affinity estimation of metalloprotein ligands. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 5437-5447.
127. Ferrara, P.; Curioni, A.; Vangrevelinghe, E.; Meyer, T.; Mordasini, T.; Andreoni, W.; Acklin, P.; Jacoby, E. New scoring functions for virtual screening from molecular dynamics simulations with a quantum-refined force-field (QRFF-MD). Application to cyclin-dependent kinase 2. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 254-263.
128. Teague, S.J. Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2, 527-541.
129. Cavasotto, C.N.; Abagyan, R.A. Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases. J. Mol. Biol. 2004, 337, 209-225.
130. Cozzini, P.; Kellogg, G.E.; Spyrakis, F.; Abraham, D.J.; Costantino, G.; Emerson, A.; Fanelli, F.; Gohlke, H.; Kuhn, L.A.; Morris, G.M.; Orozco, M.; Pertinhez, T.A.; Rizzi, M.; Sotriffer, C.A. Target flexibility: An emerging consideration in drug discovery and design. J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 6237-6255.
131. Hornak, V.; Simmerling, C. Targeting structural flexibility in HIV-1 protease inhibitor binding. Drug Discov. Today 2007, 12, 132-138.
132. Cochran, A.G. Protein-protein interfaces: Mimics and inhibitors. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2001, 5, 654-659.
133. Toogood, P.L. Inhibition of protein-protein association by small molecules: Approaches and progress. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 1543-1558.
134. Barril, X.; Morley, S.D. Unveiling the full potential of flexible receptor docking using multiple crystallographic structures. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 4432-4443.
135. Polgar, T.; Keseru, G.M. Ensemble docking into flexible active sites. Critical evaluation of FlexE against JNK-3 and betasecretase. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 1795-1805.
136. Totrov, M.; Abagyan, R. Flexible ligand docking to multiple receptor conformations: A practical alternative. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2008, 18, 178-184.
137. Floriano, W.B.; Vaidehi, N.; Zamanakos, G.; Goddard, W.A., 3rd. HierVLS hierarchical docking protocol for virtual ligand screening of large-molecule databases. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 56-71.
138. Cozza, G.; Bonvini, P.; Zorzi, E.; Poletto, G.; Pagano, M.A.; Sarno, S.; Donella-Deana, A.; Zagotto, G.; Rosolen, A.; Pinna, L.A.; Meggio, F.; Moro, S. Identification of ellagic acid as potent inhibitor of protein kinase CK2: A successful example of a virtual screening application. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 2363-2366.
139. Segers, K.; Sperandio, O.; Sack, M.; Fischer, R.; Miteva, M.A.; Rosing, J.; Nicolaes, G.A.; Villoutreix, B.O. Design of protein-membrane interaction inhibitors by virtual ligand screening, proof of concept with the C2 domain of Factor V. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 12697-12702.
140. Beautrait, A.; Leroux, V.; Chavent, M.; Ghemtio, L.; Devignes, M. D.; Smail-Tabbone, M.; Cai, W.; Shao, X.; Moreau, G.; Bladon, P.; Yao, J.; Maigret, B. Multiple-step virtual screening using VSM-G: Overview and validation of fast geometrical matching enrichment. J. Mol. Model. 2008, 14, 135-148.
141. Cho, A.E.; Wendel, J.A.; Vaidehi, N.; Kekenes-Huskey, P.M.; Floriano, W. B.; Maiti, P.K.; Goddard, W.A., iii. The MPSim-Dock hierarchical docking algorithm: Application to the eight trypsin inhibitor cocrystals. J. Comput. Chem. 2005, 26, 48-71.
142. Halgren, T.A.; Murphy, R.B.; Friesner, R.A.; Beard, H.S.; Frye, L.L.; Pollard, W.T.; Banks, J.L. Glide: A new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 1750-1759.
143. Wolf, A.; Zimmermann, M.; Hofmann-Apitius, M. Alternative to consensus scoring-a new approach toward the qualitative combination of docking algorithms. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1036-1044.
144. Maiorov, V.; Sheridan, R.P. Enhanced virtual screening by combined use of two docking methods: Getting the most on a limited budget. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 1017-1023.
145. Montes, M.; Braud, E.; Miteva, M.A.; Goddard, M.L.; Mondesert, O.; Kolb, S.; Brun, M.P.; Ducommun, B.; Garbay, C.; Villoutreix, B.O. Receptor-based virtual ligand screening for the identification of novel Cdc25 phosphatase inhibitors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 157-165.
146. Cho, Y.; Ioerger, T.R.; Sacchettini, J.C. Discovery of novel nitrobenzothiazole unhibitors for Mycobacterium tuberculosis ATP phosphoribosyl transferase (HisG) through virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 5984-5992
147. Kellenberger, E.; Springael, J.Y.; Parmentier, M.; Hachet-Haas, M.; Galzi, J.L.; Rognan, D. Identification of nonpeptide CCR5 receptor agonists by structure-based virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 1294-1303.
148. Ward, R.A.; Perkins, T.D.; Stafford, J. Structure-based virtual screening for low molecular weight chemical starting points for dipeptidyl peptidase iv inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 6991-6996.
149. Engel, S.; Skoumbourdis, A.P.; Childress, J.; Neumann, S.; Deschamps, J.R.; Thomas, C.J.; Colson, A.O.; Costanzi, S.; Gershengorn, M.C. A virtual screen for diverse ligands: Discovery of selective G protein-coupled receptor antagonists. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2008, 130, 5115-5123.
150. Cozza, G.; Gianoncelli, A.; Montopoli, M.; Caparrotta, L.; Venerando, A.; Meggio, F.; Pinna, L. A.; Zagotto, G.; Moro, S. Identification of novel protein kinase CK1 delta (CK1delta) inhibitors through structure-based virtual screening. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2008, 18, 5672-5675.
151. Hirayama, K.; Aoki, S.; Nishikawa, K.; Matsumoto, T.; Wada, K. Identification of novel chemical inhibitors for ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L3 by virtual screening. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2007, 15, 6810-6818.
152. Deng, G.; Li, W.; Shen, J.; Jiang, H.; Chen, K.; Liu, H. Pyrazolidine-3,5-dione derivatives as potent non-steroidal agonists of farnesoid X receptor: Virtual screening, synthesis, and biological evaluation. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2008, 18, 5497-5502.
153. Kumar, A.; Chaturvedi, V.; Bhatnagar, S.; Sinha, S.; Siddiqi, M. I. Knowledge based identification of potent antitubercular compounds using structure based virtual screening and structure interaction fingerprints. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 35-42.
154. Küblbeck, J.; Jyrkkärinne, J.; Poso, A.; Turpeinen, M.; Sippl, W.; Honkakoski, P.; Windshügel, B. Discovery of substituted sulfonamides and thiazolidin-4-one derivatives as agonists of human constitutive androstane receptor. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2008, 76, 1288-1297
155. Mukherjee, P.; Desai, P.; Ross, L.; White, E.L.; Avery, M.A. Structure-based virtual screening against SARS-3CL(pro) to identify novel non-peptidic hits. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2008, 16, 4138-4149.
156. Perez-Pineiro, R.; Burgos, A.; Jones, D.C.; Andrew, L.C.; Rodriguez, H.; Suarez, M.; Fairlamb, A.H.; Wishart, D.S. Development of a novel virtual screening cascade protocol to identify potential trypanothione reductase inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2009, 52, 1670-1680.
157. Hu, X.; Prehna, G.; Stebbins, C.E. Targeting plague virulence factors: A combined machine learning method and multiple conformational virtual screening for the discovery of Yersinia Protein Kinase A inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 3980-3983.
158. Tintori, C.; Manetti, F.; Veljkovic, N.; Perovic, V.; Vercammen, J.; Hayes, S.; Massa, S.; Witvrouw, M.; Debyser, Z.; Veljkovic, V.; Botta, M. Novel virtual screening protocol based on the combined use of molecular modeling and electronion interaction potential techniques to design HIV-1 integrase inhibitors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1536-1544.
159. Hellmuth, K.; Grosskopf, S.; Lum, C.T.; Würtele, M.; Röder, N.; von Kries, J.P.; Rosario, M.; Rademann, J.; Birchmeier, W. Specific inhibitors of the protein tyrosine phosphatase Shp2 identified by high-throughput docking. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 2008, 105, 7275-7280.
160. Rush, T.S., 3rd; Grant, J.A.; Mosyak, L.; Nicholls, A. A shape-based 3-D scaffold hopping method and its application to a bacterial protein-protein interaction. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 1489-1495.
161. Quintus, F.; Sperandio, O.; Grynberg, J.; Petitjean, M.; Tuffery, P. Ligand scaffold hopping combining 3D maximal substructure search and molecular similarity. BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10, 245.
162. Sperandio, O.; Andrieu, O.; Miteva, M.A.; Vo, M.Q.; Souaille, M.; Delfaud, F.; Villoutreix, B.O. Med-sumolig: A new ligand-based screening tool for efficient scaffold hopping. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1097-1110.
163. Kearsley, S.K.; Sallamack, S.; Fluder, E.M.; Andose, J.D.; Mosley, R.T.; Sheridan, R.P. Chemical similarity using physiochemical property descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 1996, 36, 118-127.
164. Sperandio, O.; Petitjean, M.; Tuffery, P. Wwligcsrre: A 3D ligand-based server for hit identification and optimization. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009, 37, W504-509.
165. Muegge, I. Synergies of virtual screening approaches. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 2008, 8, 927-933.
166. Omagari, K.; Mitomo, D.; Kubota, S.; Nakamura, H.; Fukunishi, Y. A method to enhance the hit ratio by a combination of structure-based drug screening and ligand-based screening. Advances and Applications in Bioinformatics and Chemistry 2008, 1, 19-28.
167. Li, H.; Li, C.; Gui, C.; Luo, X.; Chen, K.; Shen, J.; Wang, X.; Jiang, H. Gasdock: A new approach for rapid flexible docking based on an improved multi-population genetic algorithm. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2004, 14, 4671-4676.
168. Park, H.; Lee, J.; Lee, S. Critical assessment of the automated AutoDock as a new docking tool for virtual screening. Proteins 2006, 65, 549-554.
169. Schellhammer, I.; Rarey, M. FlexX-Scan: Fast, structure-based virtual screening. Proteins 2004, 57, 504-517.
170. Yoon, S.; Smellie, A.; Hartsough, D.; Filikov, A. Surrogate docking: Structure-based virtual screening at high throughput speed. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2005, 19, 483-497.
171. Favia, A.D.; Nobeli, I.; Glaser, F.; Thornton, J.M. Molecular docking for substrate identification: The short-chain dehydrogenases/reductases. J. Mol. Biol. 2008, 375, 855-874.
172. Stahl, M.; Rarey, M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 1035-1042.
173. Ferrara, P.; Gohlke, H.; Price, D.J.; Klebe, G.; Brooks, C.L., 3rd. Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 3032-3047.
174. Seifert, M.H. Assessing the discriminatory power of scoring functions for virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 1456-1465.
175. Cheng, T.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Liu, Z.; Wang, R. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 1079-1093.
176. Montes, M.; Miteva, M.A.; Villoutreix, B.O. Structure-based virtual ligand screening with LigandFit: Pose prediction and enrichment of compound collections. Proteins 2007, 68, 712-725.
177. Wang, R.; Lu, Y.; Wang, S. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 2287-2303.
178. Warren, G.L.; Andrews, C.W.; Capelli, A.M.; Clarke, B.; LaLonde, J.; Lambert, M.H.; Lindvall, M.; Nevins, N.; Semus, S.F.; Senger, S.; Tedesco, G.; Wall, I.D.; Woolven, J.M.; Peishoff, C.E.; Head, M.S. A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 5912-5931.
179. Teramoto, R.; Fukunishi, H. Consensus scoring with feature selection for structure-based virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 288-295.
180. Spyrakis, F.; Amadasi, A.; Fornabaio, M.; Abraham, D.J.; Mozzarelli, A.; Kellogg, G.E.; Cozzini, P. The consequences of scoring docked ligand conformations using free energy correlations. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 42, 921-33.
181. Feher, M. Consensus scoring for protein-ligand interactions. Drug Discov. Today 2006, 11, 421-428.
182. Clark, R.D.; Strizhev, A.; Leonard, J.M.; Blake, J.F.; Matthew, J.B. Consensus scoring for ligand/protein interactions. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2002, 20, 281-295.
183. Betzi, S.; Suhre, K.; Chetrit, B.; Guerlesquin, F.; Morelli, X. Gfscore: A general nonlinear consensus scoring function for high-throughput docking. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 1704-1712.
184. Kontoyianni, M.; McClellan, L.M.; Sokol, G.S. Evaluation of docking performance: Comparative data on docking algorithms. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 558-565.
185. Verdonk, M.L.; Berdini, V.; Hartshorn, M.J.; Mooij, W.T.; Murray, C.W.; Taylor, R.D.; Watson, P. Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: Avoiding artificial enrichment. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 793-806.
186. Hevener, K.E.; Zhao, W.; Ball, D.M.; Babaoglu, K.; Qi, J.; White, S.W.; Lee, R.E. Validation of molecular docking programs for virtual screening against dihydropteroate synthase. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 444-460.
187. Li, H.; Zhang, H.; Zheng, M.; Luo, J.; Kang, L.; Liu, X.; Wang, X.; Jiang, H. An effective docking strategy for virtual screening based on multi-objective optimization algorithm. BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10, 58.
188. Raha, K.; Merz, K.M., Jr. Large-scale validation of a quantum mechanics based scoring function: Predicting the binding affinity and the binding mode of a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 4558-4575.
189. Fischer, B.; Fukuzawa, K.; Wenzel, W. Receptor-specific scoring functions derived from quantum chemical models improve affinity estimates for in-silico drug discovery. Proteins 2008, 70, 1264-1273.
190. Deng, Z.; Chuaqui, C.; Singh, J. Structural interaction fingerprint (SIFt): A novel method for analyzing three-dimensional protein-ligand binding interactions. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 337-344.
191. Barillari, C.; Marcou, G.; Rognan, D. Hot-spots-guided receptor-based pharmacophores (HS-Pharm): A knowledge-based approach to identify ligand-anchoring atoms in protein cavities and prioritize structure-based pharmacophores. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1396-1410.
192. Reulecke, I.; Lange, G.; Albrecht, J.; Klein, R.; Rarey, M. Towards an integrated description of hydrogen bonding and dehydration: Decreasing false positives in virtual screening with the HYDE scoring function. ChemMedChem 2008, 3, 885-897.
193. Pencheva, T.; Samna Soumana, O.; Pajeva, I.; Miteva, M.A. Post-docking virtual screening of diverse binding pockets: Comparative study using DOCK, AMMOS, X-score and FRED scoring functions. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2010, doi:10.1016/j.ejmech.2009.12.025.
194. Schulz-Gasch, T.; Stahl, M. Binding site characteristics in structure-based virtual screening: Evaluation of current docking tools. J. Mol. Model. 2003, 9, 47-57.
195. Timmers, L.F.; Caceres, R.A.; Vivan, A.L.; Gava, L.M.; Dias, R.; Ducati, R.G.; Basso, L.A.; Santos, D.S.; de Azevedo, W.F.J. Structural studies of human purine nucleoside phosphorylase: Towards a new specific empirical scoring function. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2008, 479, 28-38.
196. Catana, C.; Stouten, P.F. Novel, customizable scoring functions, parameterized using N-PLS, for structure-based drug discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 85-91.
197. Huang, N.; Kalyanaraman, C.; Irwin, J.J.; Jacobson, M.P. Physics-based scoring of protein-ligand complexes: Enrichment of known inhibitors in large-scale virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 243-253.
198. Perola, E.; Walters, W.P.; Charifson, P.S. A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance. Proteins 2004, 56, 235-249.
199. Koska, J.; Spassov, V.Z.; Maynard, A.J.; Yan, L.; Austin, N.; Flook, P.K.; Venkatachalam, C.M. Fully automated molecular mechanics based induced fit protein-ligand docking method. J. Che.m Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1965-1973.
200. Springer, C.; Adalsteinsson, H.; Young, M.M.; Kegelmeyer, P.W.; Roe, D.C. PostDOCK: A structural, empirical approach to scoring protein ligand complexes. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 6821-6831.
201. Pencheva, T.; Lagorce, D.; Pajeva, I.; Villoutreix, B.O.; Miteva, M.A. AMMOS: Automated molecular mechanics optimization tool for in silico screening. BMC Bioinformatics 2008, 9, 438.
202. Ladbury, J.E. Just add water! The effect of water on the specificity of protein-ligand binding sites and its potential application to drug design. Chem. Biol. 1996, 3, 973-980.
203. Barillari, C.; Taylor, J.; Viner, R.; Essex, J. W. Classification of water molecules in protein binding sites. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 2577-2587.
204. Pearlman, D.A. Evaluating the Molecular Mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann Surface Area free energy method using a congeneric series of ligands to p38 MAP kinase. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 7796-7807.
205. Wang, Y.X.; Freedberg, D.I.; Wingfield, P.T.; Stahl, S.J.; Kaufman, J.D.; Kiso, Y.; Bhat, T.N.; Erickson, J.W.; Torchia, D.A. Bound water molecules at the interface between the HIV-1 protease and a potent inhibitor, KNI-272, determined by NMR. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 12287-12290.
206. Louis, J.M.; Dyda, F.; Nashed, N.T.; Kimmel, A.R.; Davies, D.R. Hydrophilic peptides derived from the transframe region of Gag-Pol inhibit the HIV-1 protease. Biochemistry 1998, 37, 2105-2110.
207. Lam, P.Y.; Jadhav, P.K.; Eyermann, C.J.; Hodge, C.N.; Ru, Y.; Bacheler, L.T.; Meek, J.L.; Otto, M.J.; Rayner, M.M.; Wong, Y.N.; et al. Rational design of potent, bioavailable, nonpeptide cyclic ureas as HIV protease inhibitors. Science 1994, 263, 380-384.
208. Grzesiek, S.; Bax, A.; Nicholson, L.K.; Yamazaki, T.; Wingfield, P.; Stahl, S.J.; Eyermann, C.J.; Torchia, D.A.; Nicholas Hodge, C.; Lam, P.Y.S.; Jadhav, P.K.; Chang, C.H. NMR evidence for the displacement of a conserved interior water molecule in HIV protease by a non-peptide cyclic urea-based inhibitor. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 1581-1582.
209. Yan, A.; Grant, G.H.; Richards, W.G. Dynamics of conserved waters in human Hsp90: Implications for drug design. J. R. So.c Interface. 2008, 5 Suppl 3, S199-205.
210. Amadasi, A.; Surface, J.A.; Spyrakis, F.; Cozzini, P.; Mozzarelli, A.; Kellogg, G.E. Robust classification of "Relevant" Water molecules in putative protein binding sites. J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 1063-1067.
211. Moitessier, N.; Westhof, E.; Hanessian, S. Docking of aminoglycosides to hydrated and flexible RNA. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 1023-1033.
212. Verdonk, M.L.; Chessari, G.; Cole, J.C.; Hartshorn, M.J.; Murray, C.W.; Nissink, J.W.; Taylor, R.D.; Taylor, R. Modeling water molecules in protein-ligand docking using GOLD. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 6504-6515.
213. Rarey, M.; Kramer, B.; Lengauer, T. The particle concept: Placing discrete water molecules during protein-ligand docking predictions. Proteins 1999, 34, 17-28.
214. Corbeil, C.R.; Moitessier, N. Docking ligands into flexible and solvated macromolecules. 3. Impact of input ligand conformation, protein flexibility, and water molecules on the accuracy of docking programs. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 997-1009.
215. Czodrowski, P.; Sotriffer, C.A.; Klebe, G. Atypical protonation states in the active site of HIV-1 protease: A computational study. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1590-1598.
216. Steuber, H.; Czodrowski, P.; Sotriffer, C.A.; Klebe, G. Tracing changes in protonation: A prerequisite to factorize thermodynamic data of inhibitor binding to aldose reductase. J. Mol. Biol. 2007, 373, 1305-1320.
217. Mitra, R.; Shyam, R.; Mitra, I.; Miteva, M.A.; Alexov, E. Protonation states of proteins and small molecules: Implications to ligand-receptor interactions. Current Computer-Aided Drug Design 2008, 4, 169-179.
218. Lee, A.C.; Crippen, G.M. Predicting pka. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 2013-2033.
219. Pospisil, P.; Ballmer, P.; Scapozza, L.; Folkers, G. Tautomerism in computer-aided drug design. J. Recept. Signal. Transduct. Res. 2003, 23, 361-371.
220. Milletti, F.; Storchi, L.; Sforna, G.; Cross, S.; Cruciani, G. Tautomer enumeration and stability prediction for virtual screening on large chemical databases. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 68-75.
221. ten Brink, T.; Exner, T.E. Influence of protonation, tautomeric, and stereoisomeric states on protein-ligand docking results. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 1535-1546.
222. Polgar, T.; Magyar, C.; Simon, I.; Keseru, G.M. Impact of ligand protonation on virtual screening against beta-secretase (BACE1). J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 2366-2373.
223. Rajamani, R.; Good, A.C. Ranking poses in structure-based lead discovery and optimization: Current trends in scoring function development. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 2007, 10, 308-315.
224. Chang, C.E.; Chen, W.; Gilson, M.K. Ligand configurational entropy and protein binding. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 2007, 104, 1534-1539.
225. Zoete, V.; Meuwly, M.; Karplus, M. Study of the insulin dimerization: Binding free energy calculations and per-residue free energy decomposition. Proteins 2005, 61, 79-93.