Comparing neural-network scoring functions and the state of the art: Applications to common library screening

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 53, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 1726-1735

  Durrant, Jacob D ^a   Friedman, Aaron J ^b   Rogers, Kathleen E ^b   McCammon, J Andrew ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING; CHEMISTRY;

COMPUTER AIDED DRUG DESIGN; DOCKING PROGRAMS; IMPROVE PERFORMANCE; LIBRARY SCREENING; SCORING FUNCTIONS; SCREENING PERFORMANCE; STATE OF THE ART; VIRTUAL SCREENING;

NEURAL NETWORKS;

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DRUG DATABASE; DRUG SCREENING; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR DOCKING; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; PROCEDURES;

DATABASES, PHARMACEUTICAL; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; HUMANS; MOLECULAR DOCKING SIMULATION; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); ROC CURVE; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84880552522     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci400042y     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Willett, P. Similarity-based virtual screening using 2D fingerprints Drug Discovery Today 2006, 11 (23-24) 1046-1053
2. Sastry, M.; Lowrie, J. F.; Dixon, S. L.; Sherman, W. Large-scale systematic analysis of 2D fingerprint methods and parameters to improve virtual screening enrichments J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2010, 50 (5) 771-784
3. Duan, J. X.; Dixon, S. L.; Lowrie, J. F.; Sherman, W. Analysis and comparison of 2D fingerprints: Insights into database screening performance using eight fingerprint methods J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 2010, 29 (2) 157-170
4. Putta, S.; Lemmen, C.; Beroza, P.; Greene, J. A novel shape-feature based approach to virtual library screening J. Chem. Inf. Comp. Sci. 2002, 42 (5) 1230-1240
5. Ballester, P. J.; Richards, W. G. Ultrafast shape recognition to search compound databases for similar molecular shapes J. Comput. Chem. 2007, 28 (10) 1711-1723
6. Yang, S. Y. Pharmacophore modeling and applications in drug discovery: Challenges and recent advances Drug Discov. Today 2010, 15 (11-12) 444-450
7. Koshland, D. E. Application of a theory of enzyme specificity to protein synthesis Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1958, 44 (2) 98-104
8. Teague, S. J. Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2003, 2 (7) 527-541
9. Ma, B.; Kumar, S.; Tsai, C. J.; Nussinov, R. Folding funnels and binding mechanisms Protein Eng. 1999, 12 (9) 713-720
10. Kumar, S.; Ma, B.; Tsai, C. J.; Wolfson, H.; Nussinov, R. Folding funnels and conformational transitions via hinge-bending motions Cell Biochem. Biophys. 1999, 31 (2) 141-164
11. Tsai, C. J.; Kumar, S.; Ma, B.; Nussinov, R. Folding funnels, binding funnels, and protein function Protein Sci. 1999, 8 (6) 1181-1190
12. Ma, B.; Shatsky, M.; Wolfson, H. J.; Nussinov, R. Multiple diverse ligands binding at a single protein site: A matter of pre-existing populations Protein Sci. 2002, 11 (2) 184-197
13. Carlson, H. A. Protein flexibility and drug design: how to hit a moving target Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2002, 6 (4) 447-452
14. Durrant, J. D.; McCammon, J. A. Computer-aided drug-discovery techniques that account for receptor flexibility Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 2010, 10 (6) 770-774
15. Thilagavathi, R.; Mancera, R. L. Ligand-protein cross-docking with water molecules J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2010, 50 (3) 415-421
16. 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 (Suppl 1) S7-26
17. Huang, S. Y.; Grinter, S. Z.; Zou, X. Q. Scoring functions and their evaluation methods for protein-ligand docking: recent advances and future directions Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2010, 12 (40) 12899-12908
18. Durrant, J. D.; McCammon, J. A. NNScore: A neural-network-based scoring function for the characterization of protein-ligand complexes J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2010, 50 (10) 1865-1871
19. Durrant, J. D.; McCammon, J. A. NNScore 2.0: A neural-network receptor-ligand scoring function J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2011, 51 (11) 2897-2903
20. Durrant, J. D.; McCammon, J. A. BINANA: A novel algorithm for ligand-binding characterization J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 2011, 29 (6) 888-893
21. 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. 2009, 31 (2) 455-461
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 (4) 962-976
23. 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 (2) 235-249
24. Cross, J. B.; Thompson, D. C.; Rai, B. K.; Baber, J. C.; Fan, K. Y.; Hu, Y. B.; Humblet, C. Comparison of several molecular docking programs: Pose prediction and virtual screening accuracy J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49 (6) 1455-1474
25. McGaughey, G. B.; Sheridan, R. P.; Bayly, C. I.; Culberson, J. C.; Kreatsoulas, C.; Lindsley, S.; Maiorov, V.; Truchon, J. F.; Cornell, W. D. Comparison of topological, shape, and docking methods in virtual screening J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47 (4) 1504-1519
26. Friesner, R. A.; Banks, J. L.; Murphy, R. B.; Halgren, T. A.; Klicic, J. J.; Mainz, D. T.; Repasky, M. P.; Knoll, E. H.; Shelley, M.; Perry, J. K.; Shaw, D. E.; Francis, P.; Shenkin, P. S. Glide: A new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47 (7) 1739-1749
27. 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 (7) 1750-1759
28. Huang, N.; Shoichet, B. K.; Irwin, J. J. Benchmarking sets for molecular docking J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49 (23) 6789-6801
29. Bissantz, C.; Folkers, G.; Rognan, D. Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. 1. Evaluation of different docking/scoring combinations J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43 (25) 4759-4767
30. Stahl, M.; Rarey, M. Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44 (7) 1035-1042
31. Schulz-Gasch, T.; Stahl, M. Binding site characteristics in structure-based virtual screening: Evaluation of current docking tools J. Mol. Model. 2003, 9 (1) 47-57
32. 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 (20) 5912-5931
33. Sanner, M. F. Python: A programming language for software integration and development J. Mol. Graphics Modell 1999, 17 (1) 57-61
34. Repasky, M. P.; Shelley, M.; Friesner, R. A. Flexible Ligand Docking with Glide. In Current Protocols in Bioinformatics; John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: New York, 2007; Unit 8.12.
35. Green, D. M.; Swets, J. A. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics; John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: New York, 1966; p xi.
36. Hawkins, P. C. D.; Warren, G. L.; Skillman, A. G.; Nicholls, A. How to do an evaluation: Pitfalls and traps J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2008, 22 (3-4) 179-190
37. Jones, E.; Oliphant, T.; Peterson, P.; SciPy: Open Source Scientific Tools for Python, version 0.11.0; 2001.
38. Ascher, D.; Dubois, P. F.; Hinsen, K.; James, J. H.; Oliphant, T. Numerical Python; UCRL-MA-128569; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: Livermore, CA, 1999.
39. Dubois, P. F. Extending Python with Fortran Comput. Sci. Eng. 1999, 1 (5) 66-73
40. Oliphant, T. E. Guide to NumPy; Brigham Young University: Provo, UT, 2006.
41. Peterson, P. F2PY: A tool for connecting Fortran and Python programs Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2009, 4 (4) 296-305
42. Jahn, A.; Hinselmann, G.; Fechner, N.; Zell, A. Optimal assignment methods for ligand-based virtual screening J. Cheminform. 2009, 1, 14
43. Good, A. C.; Oprea, T. I. Optimization of CAMD techniques 3. Virtual screening enrichment studies: A help or hindrance in tool selection? J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2008, 22 (3-4) 169-178
44. Doman, T. N.; McGovern, S. L.; Witherbee, B. J.; Kasten, T. P.; Kurumbail, R.; Stallings, W. C.; Connolly, D. T.; Shoichet, B. K. Molecular docking and high-throughput screening for novel inhibitors of protein tyrosine phosphatase-1B J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45 (11) 2213-2221
45. Jenkins, J. L.; Kao, R. Y.; Shapiro, R. Virtual screening to enrich hit lists from high-throughput screening: a case study on small-molecule inhibitors of angiogenin Proteins 2003, 50 (1) 81-93
46. Rowlands, M. G.; Newbatt, Y. M.; Prodromou, C.; Pearl, L. H.; Workman, P.; Aherne, W. High-throughput screening assay for inhibitors of heat-shock protein 90 ATPase activity Anal. Biochem. 2004, 327 (2) 176-183
47. Baldwin, J.; Michnoff, C. H.; Malmquist, N. A.; White, J.; Roth, M. G.; Rathod, P. K.; Phillips, M. A. High-throughput screening for potent and selective inhibitors of Plasmodium falciparum dihydroorotate dehydrogenase J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280 (23) 21847-21853
48. Zolli-Juran, M.; Cechetto, J. D.; Hartlen, R.; Daigle, D. M.; Brown, E. D. High-throughput screening identifies novel inhibitors of Escherichia coli dihydrofolate reductase that are competitive with dihydrofolate Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2003, 13 (15) 2493-2496
49. Blanchard, J. E.; Elowe, N. H.; Huitema, C.; Fortin, P. D.; Cechetto, J. D.; Eltis, L. D.; Brown, E. D. High-throughput screening identifies inhibitors of the SARS coronavirus main proteinase Chem. Biol. 2004, 11 (10) 1445-1453
50. Parniak, M. A.; Min, K. L.; Budihas, S. R.; Le Grice, S. F.; Beutler, J. A. A fluorescence-based high-throughput screening assay for inhibitors of human immunodeficiency virus-1 reverse transcriptase-associated ribonuclease H activity Anal. Biochem. 2003, 322 (1) 33-39
51. Liebeschuetz, J. W. Evaluating docking programs: Keeping the playing field level J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2008, 22 (3-4) 229-238
52. Kuck, D.; Singh, N.; Lyko, F.; Medina-Franco, J. L. Novel and selective DNA methyltransferase inhibitors: Docking-based virtual screening and experimental evaluation Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2010, 18 (2) 822-829
53. Fisher, R. A. Statistical Methods for Research Workers; Oliver and Boyd: Edinburgh, London, 1925; p ix, 1 l.
54. Truchon, J. F.; Bayly, C. I. Evaluating virtual screening methods: Good and bad metrics for the "early recognition" problem J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47 (2) 488-508
55. Mahasenan, K. V.; Pavlovicz, R. E.; Henderson, B. J.; Gonzalez-Cestari, T. F.; Yi, B. N.; McKay, D. B.; Li, C. L. Discovery of novel alpha 4 beta 2 neuronal nicotinic receptor modulators through structure-based virtual screening ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 2011, 2 (11) 855-860
56. Podvinec, M.; Lim, S. P.; Schmidt, T.; Scarsi, M.; Wen, D. Y.; Sonntag, L. S.; Sanschagrin, P.; Shenkin, P. S.; Schwede, T. Novel inhibitors of dengue virus methyltransferase: Discovery by in vitro-driven virtual screening on a desktop computer grid J. Med. Chem. 2010, 53 (4) 1483-1495
57. Rajender, P. S.; Vasavi, M.; Vuruputuri, U. Identification of novel selective antagonists for cyclin C by homology modeling and virtual screening Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2011, 48 (2) 292-300
58. Vigers, G. P.; Rizzi, J. P. Multiple active site corrections for docking and virtual screening J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47 (1) 80-89
59. Hu, L.; Benson, M. L.; Smith, R. D.; Lerner, M. G.; Carlson, H. A. Binding MOAD (mother of all databases) Proteins 2005, 60 (3) 333-340
60. Rees, D. C.; Congreve, M.; Murray, C. W.; Carr, R. Fragment-based lead discovery Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2004, 3 (8) 660-672
61. Sastry, G. M.; Adzhigirey, M.; Day, T.; Annabhimoju, R.; Sherman, W. Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2013, 27 (3) 221-234