In silico pharmacology for a multidisciplinary drug discovery process

Drug Metabolism and Drug Interactions

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 199-207

  Ortega, Santiago Schiaffino ^a   Cara, Luisa Carlota López ^a   Salvador, María Kimatrai ^a  

^a Facultad de Farmacia   (Spain)

Author keywords

Docking; In silico pharmacology; Pharmacophore; Rational drug design; Structure activity relationship (SAR)

Indexed keywords

COMBINATORIAL CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER MODEL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG BIOAVAILABILITY; DRUG COST; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG SCREENING; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; PHARMACOLOGY; PHARMACOPHORE; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG DISCOVERY; HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING ASSAYS; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 84877945432     PISSN: 07925077     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/dmdi-2012-0021     Document Type: Review

References (65)

1. Verbanac D. Predictive methods as a powerful tool in drug discovery. Biochem Med 2010;20:314-8.
2. Khan F, Yadav DK, Maurya A, Srivastava SK. Modern methods and web resources in drug design and discovery. Lett Drug Design Discov 2011;8:469-90.
3. Dimasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HA, Lasagna L. Research and development cost for new drugs by therapeutic category. A study of the United States pharmaceutical industry. Pharmacoeconomics 1995;7:152-69.
4. Gohlke H, Klebe G. Approaches to the description and prediction of the binding affinity small-molecule ligands to macromolecular receptors. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2002;41:2644-76.
5. Searls DB. Using bioinformatics in gene and drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 2000;5:135-43.
6. Lenz GR, Nash HM, Jindal S. Chemical ligands, genomics and drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 2000;5:145-56.
7. Ekins S, Mestres J, Testa B. In silico pharmacology for drug discovery: methods for virtual ligand screening and profiling. Br J Pharmacol 2007;152:9-20.
8. Dean PM. Molecular recognition: the measurement and search for molecular similarity in ligand-receptor interaction. In: Maggiora GM, Johnson MA, editors. Concepts and applications of molecular similarity. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990:99-117.
9. Willett P. Similarity-based approaches to virtual screening. Biochem Soc Trans 2003;31:603-6.
10. Hansch C, Fujita T. Rho-Sigma-Pi analysis. Method for correlation of biological activity-chemical structure. J Am Chem Soc 1964;86:1616-26.
11. Wermuth CG, Ganellin CR, Lindberg P, Mitscher LA. Glossary of terms used in medicinal chemistry. Pure Appl Chem 1998;70:1129-43.
12. Wang SM, Zaharevitz DW, Sharma R, Marquez VE, Lewin NE, Du L, et al. The discovery of novel, structurally diverse protein kinase C agonist through computer 3D-database pharmacophore search. Molecular modeling studies. J Med Chem 1994;37:4479-89.
13. Carlson HA, Masukawa KM, Rubins K, Bushman FD, Jorgensen WL, Lins RD, et al. Developing a dynamic pharmacophore model for HIV-1 integrase. J Med Chem 2000;43:2100-14.
14. Nicklaus MC, Neamati N, Hong HX, Mazumder A, Sunder S, Chen J, et al. HIV-1 integrase pharmacophore: discovery of inhibitors through three-dimensional database searching. J Med Chem 1997;40:920-9.
15. Ekins S, Swaan PW. Development of computational models for enzymes, transporters, channels and receptors relevant to ADME/Tox. Rev Comp Chem 2004;20:333-415.
16. Rognan D. Chemogenomic approaches to rational drug design. Br J Pharmacol 2007;152:38-52.
17. Klabunde T. Chemogenomic approaches to drug discovery: similar receptors bind similar ligands. Br J Pharmacol 2007;152:5-7.
18. Leach AR, Gillet VJ, Lewis RA, Taylor R. Three-dimensional pharmacophore methods in drug discovery. J Med Chem 2010;53:539-58.
19. Dixon SL, Smondyrev AM, Knoll EH, Rao SN, Shaw DE, Friesner RA. PHASE: a new engine for pharmacophore perception, 3D QSAR model development, and 3D database screening: 1. Methodology and preliminary results. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2006;20:647-71.
20. Barnum D, Greene J, Smellie A, Sprague P. Identification of common functional configurations among molecules. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1996;36:563-71.
21. Richmond NJ, Abrams CA, Wolohan PR, Abrahamian E, Willet P, Clark RD. GALAHAD: 1. Pharmacophore identification by hypermolecular alignment of ligands in 3D. J Comput AidedMol Des 2006;20:567-87.
22. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC. A genetic algorithm for flexible molecular overlay and pharmacophore elucidation. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1995;9:532-49.
23. Chemical Computing Group. Molecular operating environment. Montreal, Canada: Chemical Computing Group (http://www.chemcomp.com/).
24. Murcko MA. Recent advances in ligand design methods. Rev Comput Chem 1997;11:1-66.
25. Clark DE, Murray CW, Li J. Current issues in de novo molecular design. Rev Comput Chem 1997;11:67-125.
26. Lengauer T, Rarey M. Computational methods for biomolecular docking. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1996;6:402-6.
27. Böhm HJ, Stahl M. Structure-based library design: molecular modelling merges with combinatorial chemistry. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2000;4:283-6.
28. Jaim AN. Effects of protein conformation in docking: improved pose prediction though protein pocket adaptation. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2009;23:355-74
29. Friesner RA, Banks JL, Murphy RB, Halgren TA, Klicic JJ, Mainz DT, et al. Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J Med Chem 2004;47:1739-49.
30. McGann MR, Almond HR, Nicholls A, Grant JA, Brown FK. Gaussian docking functions. Biopolymers 2003;68:76-90.
31. Ewing TJ, Kuntz ID. Critical evaluation of search algorithms for automated molecular docking and database screening. J Comput Chem 1997;18:1175-89.
32. Rarey M, Kramer B, Lengauer T, Klebe G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J Mol Biol 1996;261:470-89.
33. Welch W, Ruppert J, Jain AN. Hammerhead: fast, fully automated docking of flexible ligands to protein binding sites. Chem Biol 1996;3:449-62.
34. Irwin JJ, Shoichet BK. ZINC-A free database of commercially available compounds for virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model 2005;45:177-82.
35. Faraldo-Gómez JD, Roux B. Characterization of conformational equilibria through Hamiltonian and temperature replicaexchange simulations: assessing entropic and environmental effects. J Comput Chem 2007;28:1634-47.
36. Glen RC, Allen SC. Ligand-protein docking: cancer research at the interface between biology and chemistry. Curr Med Chem 2003;10:763-77.
37. Kitchen DB, Decornez H, Furr JR, Bajorath J. Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2004;3:935-49.
38. Huang S-Y, Zou X. Advances and challenges in protein-ligand docking. Int J Mol Sci 2010;11:3016-34.
39. Huang S-Y, Zou X. Inclusion of solvation and entropy in the knowledge-based scoring function for protein-ligand interactions. J Chem Inf Model 2010;50:262-73.
40. Berman HM, Bhat TN, Bourne PE, Feng ZK, Gilliland G, Weissig H, et al. The protein data bank and the challenge of structural genomics. Nat Struct Biol 2000;7:957-9.
41. Westbrook J, Feng ZK, Chen L, Yang HW, Berman HM. The protein data bank and structural genomics. Nucleic Acid Res 2003;31:489-91.
42. Scherzer-Attali R, Pellarin R, Convertino M, Frydman-Marom A, Egoz-Matia N, Peled S, et al. Complete phenotypic recovery of an Alzheimer's disease model by a quinone-Tryptophan hybrid aggregation inhibitor. PloS One 2010;5:e11101.
43. Takahashi T, Ohta K, Mihara H. Rational design of amyloid ®peptide-binding proteins: pseudo-A ®®sheet surface presented in green fluorescent protein binds tightly and preferentially to structured A ®. Proteins 2010;78:336-47.
44. Huang H, Chen Q, Ku X, Meng L, Lin L, Wang X, et al. A series of 〈-heterocyclic carboxaldehyde thiosemicarbazones inhibit topoisomerase II 〈catalytic activity. J Med Chem 2010;53: 3048-64.
45. Murphy EA, Shields DJ, Stoletov K, Dneprovskaia E, McElroy M, Greenberg JI, et al. Disruption of angiogenesis and tumor growth with an orally active drug that stabilizes the inactive state of PDGFR ®/B-RAF. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010;107: 4299-304.
46. Liu JJ, Zeng NH, Zhang LR, Zhan YY, Chen Y, Wang YA, et al. A unique pharmacophore for activation of the nuclear orphan receptor Nur77 in vivo and in vitro. Cancer Res 2010;70: 3628-37.
47. Kozikowski AP, Cho SJ, Jensen NH, Allen JA, Svennebring AM, Roth BL. HTS and rational drug design to generate a class of 5-HT2C-selective ligands for possible use in schizophrenia. Chem Med Chem 2010;5:1221-5.
48. Ekins S, Mestres J, Testa B. In silico pharmacology for drug discovery: applications to targets and beyond. Br J Pharmacol 2007;152:21-37.
49. Coupez B, Lewis RA. Docking and scoring. Theoretically easy, practically impossible? Curr Med Chem 2006;13:2995-3003.
50. Geppert T, Bauer S, Hiss JA, Conrad E, Reutlinger M, Schneider P, et al. Immunosuppressive small molecule discovered by structure-based virtual screening for inhibitors of proteinprotein interactions. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2012;51: 258-61.
51. Cournia Z, Leng L, Gandavadi S, Du X, Bucala R, Jorgensen WL. Discovery of human macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF)-CD74 antagonists via virtual screening. J Med Chem 2009;52:416-24.
52. Barreiro G, Kim JT, Guimaraes CR, Bailey CM, Domaoal RA, Wang L, et al. From docking false positive to active anti-HIV agent. J Med Chem 2007;50:5324-9.
53. van de Waterbeemd H, Gifford E. ADMET in silico modelling: towards prediction paradise? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2003;2: 192-204.
54. Hodgson J. ADMET-Turning chemical into drugs. Nat Biotechnol 2001;19:722-6.
55. Gleeson P, Hersey A, Hannongbua S. In silico ADME models: a general assessment of their utility in drug discovery applications. Curr Topics Med Chem 2011;11:358-81.
56. Jorgensen WL. Efficient drug lead discovery and optimization. Acc Chem Res 2009;42:724-33.
57. Wang HW, Duffy RA, Boykow GC, Chackalamannil S, Madison VS. Identification of novel cannabinoid CB1 receptor antagonists by using virtual screening with a pharmacophore model. J Med Chem 2008;51:2439-46.
58. Rella M, Rushworth CA, Guy JL, Turner AJ, Langer T, Jackson RM. Structure-based pharmacophore design and virtual screening for novel angiotensin converting enzyme 2 inhibitors. J Chem Inf Model 2006;46:708-16.
59. Clackers M, Coe DM, Demaine DA, Hardy GW, Humphreys D, Inglis GG, et al. Non-steroidal glucocorticoid agonist. The discovery of aryl pyrazoles as A-ring mimetics. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2007;17:4737-45.
60. Taft CA, Da Silva VB, Da Silva CH. Current topics in computeraided drug design. J Pharm Sci 2008;97:1089-98.
61. Shukla S, Choubey SK, Srivastava P, Gomase VS. Chemoinformatics-An emerging field for computer aided drug design. J Biotechnol Lett 2010;1:10-4.
62. Rao VS, Srinivas K. Modern drug discovery process: an in silico approach. J Bioinform Seq Anal 2011;2:89-94.
63. Wang JA, Hewick RM. Proteomics in drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 1999;4:129-33.
64. Cusick ME, Klitgord N, Vidal M, Hill DE. Interactome: gateway into systems biology. Hum Mol Genet 2005;2: 171-81.
65. Gurwitz D. Cataloging the interactome of small molecules and the human proteome. Drug Dev Res 2011;72:1-3.