3D Quantitative Structure-Property Relationships

The Practice of Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 587-604

  Langer, Thierry ^a,c   Bryant, Sharon D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^c Inte:Ligand GmbH   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84882520412     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-374194-3.00029-9     Document Type: Chapter

References (120)

1. Hansch C., Leo A. Exploring QSAR. Fundamentals and Applications in Chemistry and Biology 1995, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
2. Kubinyi H. QSAR and 3D QSAR in Drug Design. Drug Discov. Today. 1997, 2:457-467.
3. Fujita T. Recent success stories leading to commercializable bioactive compounds with the aid of traditional QSAR procedures. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 1997, 16:107-112.
4. Todeschini R., Consonni V. Handbook of Molecular Descriptors 2000, Weinheim, Wiley-VCH.
5. Fujita T. The role of QSAR in drug design. Drug Design: Fact or Fantasy? 1984, 19-33. Academic Press, London. G. Jolles, K.R. Wolldridge (Eds.).
6. Cramer R.D., Patterson D.E., Bunce J.D. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110:5959-5967.
7. Cramer, R. D., III, Wold, S. CoMFA US patent application number. 237491, August 1988.
8. Cramer, R. D., III, Wold. S. CoMFA; US patent number 5307287. Filing date: June 17, 1991, Issue date: April 26, 1994.
9. Wise M., Cramer R.D., Smith D., Exman I. Progress in three-dimensional drug design: the use of real-time colour graphics and computer postulation of bioactive molecules in DYLOMMS. Quantitative Approaches to Drug Design 1983, 145-146. Elsevier, Amsterdam. J.C. Deardon (Ed.).
10. Cramer, R. D., III, Bunce, J. D. The DYLOMMS method: initial results from a comparative study of approaches to 3D QSAR. In Pharmacochemistry Library, Vol. 10, QSAR Drug Des. Toxicol., Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1987, pp. 3-12.
11. Höltje H.-D., Kier L.B. Sweet taste receptor studies using model interaction energy calculations. J. Pharm. Sci. 1974, 63:1722-1725.
12. Höltje H.-D., Kier L.B. Structure-activity studies of enzyme substrates using model interaction calculations. J. Theor. Biol. 1974, 48:197-205.
13. Höltje H.-D. Quantum chemical experiments on drug receptor complexes. Pharm. Unserer Zeit. 1975, 4:108-117.
14. Marshall G.R., Barry C.D., Bosshard H.E., Dammkoehler R.A., Dunn D.A. The conformational parameter in drug design: the active analog approach. Computer-Assisted Drug Design 1979, 205-226. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC. E.C. Olson, R.E. Christofferesen (Eds.).
15. Wold S., Ruhe A., Wold H., Dunn W.J. The covariance problem in linear regression. The partial least squares (PLS) approach to generalized inverses. SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comp. 1984, 5:735-743.
16. Sippl W. 3D-QSAR using the GRID/GOLPE approach. Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry, Molecular Interaction Fields 2006, Vol. 27:145-170. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim. G. Cruciani (Ed.).
17. Goodford P.J. A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. J. Med. Chem. 1985, 28:849-857. The program GRID is available from Molecular Discovery Ltd., 215 Marsh Road, 1HA5 5NE, Pinner, UK (http://www.moldiscovery.com).
18. Baroni M., Clementi S., Cruciani G., Costantino G., Riganelli D., Oberrauch E. Predictive ability of regression models. Part II: Selection of the best predictive PLS model. J. Chemometr. 1992, 6:347-356.
19. 3D QSAR in Drug Design. Theory, Methods and Applications 1993, ESCOM Science Publisher B.V, Leiden. H. Kubinyi (Ed.).
20. 3D QSAR in Drug Design. Ligand-Protein Interactions and Molecular Similarity 1998, Kluwer/ ESCOM, Dordrecht. H. Kubinyi, G. Folkers, Y.C. Martin (Eds.).
21. 3D QSAR in Drug Design. Recent Advances 1998, Kluwer/ESCOM, Dordrecht. H. Kubinyi, G. Folkers, Y.C. Martin (Eds.).
22. Martin Y.C. 3D QSAR: current state, scope and limitations. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. 1998, 12:3-23.
23. Norinder U. Recent progress in CoMFA methodology and related techniques. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. 1998, 12:3-23.
24. Podlogar B.L., Ferguson D.M. QSAR and CoMFA: a perspective on the practical application to drug discovery. Drug Des. Discov. 2000, 1:4-12.
25. Akamatsu M. Current state and perspectives of 3D QSAR. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2002, 2:1381-1394.
26. Wermuth C.-G., Ganellin C.R., Lindberg P., Mitscher L.A. Glossary of terms used in medicinal chemistry (IUPAC recommendations 1997). Annu. Rep. Med. Chem. 1998, 33:385-395.
27. OMEGA is available from OpenEye Scientific Software, 9 Bisbee Court, Suite D Santa Fe, NM 87508, USA (http://www.eyesopen.com).
28. CATALYST is available from Accelrys, Inc. 10188 Telesis Court, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92121, USA (http://www.accelrys.com).
29. Kirchmair J., Laggner C., Wolber G., Langer T. Comparative analysis of protein-bound ligand conformations with respect to catalyst's conformational space subsampling algorithms. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45:422-430.
30. 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.
31. Wolber G., Dornhofer A.A., Langer T. Efficient overlay of small organic molecules using 3D pharmacophores. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2006, 20:773-788.
32. Clark M., Cramer R.D., Jones D., Patterson D., Simeroth P. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA): 2. Toward its use with 3D structural databases. Tetrahedron Comp. Meth. 1990, 3:47.
33. Kearsley S., Smith.G. An alternative method for the alignment of molecular structures: maximizing electrostatic and steric overlap. Tetrahedron Comp. Meth. 1990, 3:615.
34. Feuston, B.P. , Miller , M. D., Culberson, J.C. , Nachbar , R.B. , Kearsley , S.K. Comparison of knowledge-based and distance geometry approaches for generation of molecular conformations. J.Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001 , 41(3), 754-763.
35. Klebe G., Mietzner T., Weber F. Different approaches toward an automatic structural alignment of drug molecules: applications to sterol mimics, thrombin and thermolysin inhibitors. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1994, 8:751-778.
36. Lemmen C., Lengauer.T. Computational methods for the structural alignment of molecules. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2000, 14:215-232.
37. 2 guided region selection for CoMFA studies. Perspect. Drug Disc. Des. 1998, 12/13/14:57-69.
38. Langer T., Hoffmann R.D. Use of the catalyst program as a new alignment tool for 3D QSAR. QSAR and Molecular Modelling: Concepts, Computational Tools and Biological Applications 1995, 466-469. Prous Science, Barcelona. F. Sanz, J. Giraldo, F. Manaut (Eds.).
39. Palomer A., Giolitti A., García M.L., Cabré F., Mauléon D., Carganico G. Molecular modeling and CoMFA investigations on LTD4 receptor antagonists. Q SAR and Molecular Modelling: Concepts, Computational Tools and Biological Applications 1995, 444-450. Prous Science, Barcelona. F. Sanz, J. Giraldo, F. Manaut (Eds.).
40. Langer T., Hoffmann R.D. On the use of chemical functionbased alignments as input for 3D-QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 1998, 38:325-330.
41. Cruciani G. Molecular Interaction Fields. Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry 2006, Vol. 27. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim. R. Mannhold., H. Kubinyi., G. Folkers. (Eds.).
42. Crivori P., Cruciani G., Carrupt P.A., Testa B. Predicting bloodbrain barrier permeation from three-dimensional molecular structure. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43:2204-2216.
43. Cruciani G., Carosati E., DeBoeck B., Ethirajulu K., Mackie C., Howe T., Vianello R. MetaSite: understanding metabolism in human cytochromes from the perspective of the Chemist. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48:6970-6979. The program METASITE is available from Molecular Discovery Ltd., 215 Marsh Road, 1HA5 5NE, Pinner, UK (http://www.moldiscovery.com).
44. Floersheim P., Nozulak J., Weber H.P. Exeperience with comparative molecular field analysis. Trends in QSAR and Molecular Modeling '92 1993, 227-232. ESCOM, Leiden. C.-G. Wermuth (Ed.).
45. Carrupt P.A., Gaillard P., Billois F., Weber P., Testa B., Meyer C., Perez S. The molecular lipophilicity potential (MLP): a new tool for log Pcalculation and docking, and in comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). Lipophilicity in Drug Action and Toxicology 1995, 195-215. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim. V. Pliska, B. Testa, H. van de Waterbeemd (Eds.).
46. Kellog G.E., Abraham D.J. Key, lock, and locksmith: complementary hydrophobic map predictions of drug structure from a known receptor-receptor structure from known drugs. J. Mol. Graph. 1992, 10:212-217.
47. Wade, R. C. Calculation and application of molecular interaction fields. In Molecular Interaction Fields (Mannhold, R., Kubinyi, H., Folkers, G. Eds), In Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry (Cruciani, G., Ed.), Vol. 27, Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2006, pp. 27-42.
48. Klebe G., Abraham U. On the prediction of binding properties of drug molecules by comparative molecular field analysis. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 36:70-80.
49. Wold S., Esbensen K., Geladi P. Principal component analysis. Chemometr. Intellig. Lab. Syst. 1987, 2:37-52.
50. Wold S., Geladi P., Esbensen K., Öhman J. Multi-way principal components- and PLS-analysis. J. Chemometr. 2005, 1:41-56.
51. Caliendo G., Greco G., Novellino E., Perissutti E., Santagada V. Combined use of factorial design and comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA): a case study. Quant.-Struct. Act. Relat. Comb. Des. 2006, 13:249-261.
52. Skagerberg B., Bonelli D., Clementi S., Cruciani G., Ebert C. Principal properties for aromatic substituents. A multivariate approach for design in QSAR. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 1989, 8:32-38.
53. Langer T. Molecular similarity determination of heteroaromatic ring fragments using GRID and multivariate data analysis. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 1996, 15:469-474.
54. Pastor, M. Alignment-independent descriptors from molecular interaction fields. In Molecular Interaction Fields (Cruciani, G., Ed.), In Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry (Mannhold, R., Kubinyi, H., Folkers, G., Eds), Vol. 27, Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2006, pp. 117-143.
55. Cruciani G., Pastor M., Guba W. VolSurf: a new tool for the pharmacokinetic optimization of lead compounds. E ur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2000, 11:S29-sS39.
56. VOLSURF is available from Molecular Discovery Ltd., 215 Marsh Road, 1HA5 5NE, Pinner, UK (). http://www.moldiscovery.com.
57. Pastor M., Cruciani G., McLay I., Pickett S., Clementi S. GRid-INdependent descriptors (GRIND): a novel class of alignmentindependent three-dimensional molecular descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43:3233-3243.
58. Mannhold, R., Berellini, G., Carosati, E., Benedetti, P. Use of MIFbased VolSurf descriptors in physicochemical and pharmacokinetic studies. In Molecular Interaction Fields (Cruciani, G., Ed.), In Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry (Mannhold, R., Kubinyi, H., Folkers, G., Eds), Vol. 27, Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2006, pp. 173-196.
59. Ottaviani G., Martel S., Carrupt P.-A. In silico and in vitro filters for the fast estimation of skin permeation and distribution of new chemical entities. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50:742-748.
60. Doddareddy M.R., Cho Y.S., Koh H.Y., Kim D.H., Pae A.E. In silico renal clearance model using classical Volsurf approach. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46:1312-1320.
61. Braiuca P., Buthe A., Ebert C., Linda P., Gardossi L. Volsurf computational method applied to the prediction of stability of thermostable enzymes. Biotechnol. J. 2007, 2:214-220.
62. ALMOND is available from Molecular Discovery Ltd., 215 Marsh Road, 1HA5 5NE, Pinner, UK (). http://www.moldiscovery.com.
63. Afzelius L., Zamora I., Masimirembwa C.M., Karlen A., Andersson T.B., Mecucci S., Baroni M., Cruciani G. Conformerand alignment-independent model for predicting structurally diverse competitive CYP2C9 inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47:907-914.
64. Benedetti P., Mannhold R., Cruciani G., Pastor M. GBR compounds and mepyramines as cocaine abuse therapeutics: chemometric studies on selectivity using grid independent descriptors (GRIND). J. Med. Chem. 2005, 45:1577-1584.
65. Cianchetta G., Singleton R.W., Zhang M., Wildgoose M., Giesing D., Fravolini A., Cruciani G., Vaz R.J. A pharmacophore hypothesis for P-glycoprotein substrate recognition using GRIND-based 3D-QSAR. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48:2927-2935.
66. Caron G., Ermondi G. Influence of conformation on GRIND-based three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D-QSAR). J. Med. Chem. 2007, ASAP Article 10.1021/jm0704651 S0022-2623(07)00465-7.
67. Cruciani G., Pastor M., Mannhold R. Suitability of molecular descriptors for database mining. A comparative analysis. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45:2685-2694.
68. Fontaine F., Pastor M., Gutierrez de Teran H., Lozano J.J., Sanz F. Use of alignment-free molecular descriptors in diversity analysis and optimal sampling of molecular libraries. Mol. Divers. 2003, 6:135-147.
69. Fontaine F., Pastor M., Zamora I., Sanz F. Anchor-GRIND: filling the gap between standard 3D QSAR and the GRid-INdependent descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48:2687-2694.
70. Hopfinger A.J., Wang S., Tokarski J.S., Jin B., Alburquerque M.G., Madhav P.J., Duraiswami C. Construction of 3D-QSAR models using the 4D-QSAR analysis formalism. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119:10509-10524.
71. Albuquerque M.G., Hopfinger A.J., Barreiro E.J., de Alencastro R.B. Four-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis of a series of interphenylene 7-oxabicycloheptane oxazole thromboxane A2 receptor antagonists. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38:925-938.
72. Klein C.D., Hopfinger A.J. Pharmacological activity and membrane interactions of antiarrhythmics: 4D-QSAR/QSPR analysis. Pharm. Res. 1998, 15:303-311.
73. Albuquerque M.G., Araujo de Brito M., Ferreira da Cunha E.F., Bicca de Alencastro R., Antunes O.A.C., Castro H.C., Rodrigues C.R. Multidimensional-QSAR: beyond the third-dimension in drug design. Curr. Meth. Med. Chem. Biol. Phys. 2007, 1:91-100.
74. Oprea T.I., Garcia A.E. Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships of steroid aromatase inhibitors. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1996, 10:186-200.
75. 2!. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2002, 20:269-276.
76. Kubinyi H., Hamprecht F.A., Mietzner T. Three-dimensional quantitative similarity-activity relationships (3D QSiAR) from SEAL similarity matrices. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41:2553-2564.
77. Golbraikh A., Shen M., Xiao Z., Xiao Y., Lee K.-H., Tropsha A. Rational selection of training and test sets for the development of validated QSAR models. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17:241-253.
78. Norinder U. Single and domain made variable selection in 3D QSAR applications. J. Chemometr. 1996, 10:95-105.
79. Doweyko A.M. 3D QSAR illusions. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2004, 18:587-596.
80. Sippl W., Contreras J.M., Parrot I., Rival Y., Wermuth C.G. Structure-based 3D QSAR and design of novel acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. J. Comput.- Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15:395-410.
81. Sippl W. Development of biologically active compounds by combining 3D QSAR and structure-based design methods. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16:825-830.
82. Massoulie J., Pezzementi L., Bon S., Krejci E., Velette F.M. Molecular and cellular biology of the cholinestereases. Prog. Neurobiol. 1993, 41:31-39.
83. Crismon M.L. Tacrine: first drug approved for Alzheimer's disease. Ann. Pharmacother. 1994, 28:744-751.
84. Barner E.L., Gray S.L. Donepezil in Alzheimer's Disease. Ann. Pharmacother. 1998, 32:70-77.
85. Barril X., Orozco M., Luque F.J. Towards improved acetylcholinesterase inhibitors: a structural and computational approach. Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 2001, 1:255-266.
86. Bourne Y., Taylor P., Radic Z., Marchot P. Structural insights into ligand interactions at the acetylcholinesterase peripheral anionic site. EMBO J 2003, 22:1-12.
87. Sussman J.L., Harel M., Frolow F., Oefner C., Goldman A., Toker L., Silman I. Atomic structure of acetylcholinesterase from torpedo californica: a prototypic acetylcholine-binding protein. Science 1991, 253:872-879.
88. Harel M., Quinn D.M., Nair H.K., Silman I., Sussman J.L. The X-ray structure of a transition state analog complex reveals the molecular origins of the catalytic power and substrate specificity of acetylcholinesterase. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118:2340-2346.
89. Wermuth C.-G., Schlewer G., Bourguignon J.-J., Maghioros G., Bouchet M.J., Moire C., Kan J.P., Worms P., Biziere K. 3-Aminopyridazine derivatives with atypical antidepressant serotonergic, and dopaminergic activities. J. Med. Chem. 1989, 32:528-537.
90. Contreras J.-M., Rival Y., Chayer S., Bourguignon J.-J., Wermuth C.-G. Aminopyridazines as acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42:730-741.
91. AUTODOCK is available from the Molecular Graphics Laboratory, Department of Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, MB-5 10550 N. Torrey Pines Rd., La Jolla, CA 92037-1000, USA (). http://autodock.scripps.edu/.
92. Vedani A., Huhta D.W. A new force field for modeling metalloproteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112:269-280.
93. Vedani A., Dunitz J.D. Lone-pair directionality of H-bond potential functions for molecular mechanics calculations: the inhibition of human carbonic anhydrase II by sulfonamides. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985, 107:7653-7658.
94. Kryger G., Silman I., Sussman J.L. Structure of acetylcholinesterase complexed with E2020 (Aricept): implications for the design of new anti-Alzheimer drugs. Struct. Fold. Des. 1999, 15:297-307.
95. Wolber G., Langer T. LigandScout: 3-D pharmacophores derived from protein-bound ligands and their use as virtual screening filters. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45:160-169.
96. LIGANDSCOUT is available from Inte:Ligand GmbH, Mariahilferstrasse 74b/11, 1070 Vienna, Austria (). http://www.inteligand.com.
97. Dean P.M. Defining molecular similarity and complementary for drug design. Molecular Similarity in Drug Design 1995, 1-23. Blackie Academic & Professional, London, UK. P.M. Dean (Ed.).
98. Dean P.M. Molecular similarity. 3D QSAR in Drug Design: Theory, Methods, and Applications 1993, 150-172. ESCOM, Leiden. H. Kubinyi (Ed.).
99. Lin T.C., Pavlik P.A., Martin Y.C. Use of molecular fields to compare series of potentially bioactive molecules designed by scientists or by computer. Tetrahedron Comput. Methodol. 1990, 3:723-738.
100. Wold S., Sjöström M., Carlson R., Lundstedt T., Hellberg S., Skagerberg B., Wirkström C., Öhman J. Multivariate design. Anal. Chim. Acta 1986, 191:17-32.
101. Clementi S., Cruciani G., Baroni M., Costantino G. Series design. 3D QSAR in drug design: theory, methods, and applications 1993, 567-582. ESCOM, Leiden. H. Kubinyi (Ed.).
102. Van de Waterbeemd H., Clementi S., Costantino G., Carrupt P.-A., Testa B. CoMFA derived substituent descriptors for structureproperty correlations. 3D QSAR in drug design: theory, methods, and applications 1993, 697-707. ESCOM, Leiden. H. Kubinyi (Ed.).
103. Clementi S., Cruciani G., Riganelli D., Valigi R., Costantino G., Baroni M., Wold S. Autocorrelation as a tool for a congruent description of molecules in 3D QSAR studies. Pharm. Pharmacol. Lett. 1993, 3:433-438.
104. Hellberg S., Sjöström M., Skagerberg B., Wold S. Peptide quantitative structure-activity relationships, a multivariate approach. J. Med. Chem. 1987, 30:1127-1135.
105. Cocchi M., Johansson E. Amino acids characterization by GRID and multivariate data analysis. Q uant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 1993, 12:1-8.
106. Hellberg S., Sjöström M., Skagerberg B., Wold S. On the use of multipositionally varied test series for quantitative structure-activity relationships. Acta Pharm. Jugosl. 1987, 37:53-65.
107. Langer T. Molecular similarity determination of heteroaromatics using CoMFA and multivariate data analysis. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 1994, 13:402-405.
108. Langer T. Molecular similarity determination of heteroaromatic ring fragments using GRID and multivariate data analysis. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 1996, 15:469-474.
109. Clark M., Cramer R.D., Van Opdenbosch N. Validation of the general purpose TRIPOS 5.2 force field. J. Comput. Chem. 1989, 10:982-1012.
110. Wermuth C.G. Molecular variations based on isosteric replacements. The practice of medicinal chemistry 1996, 203-237. Academic Press, London. C.-G. Wermuth (Ed.).
111. Caruso L., Katritzky A.R., Musumarra G. Classical and magnetic aromaticities as new descriptors for heteroaromatics in QSAR. Part 3. Principal properties for heteroaromatics. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 1993, 12:146-151.
112. SYBYL is available from Tripos, 1699 South Hanley Road, St. Louis, MO 63144-2319, USA (). http://www.tripos.com.
113. Klebe G., Abraham U., Mietzner T. Molecular similarity indices in a comparative analysis (CoMSIA) of drug molecules to correlate and predict their biological activity. J. Med. Chem. 1994, 37:4130-4146.
114. Doweyko A.M. The hypothetical active site lattice. An approach to modeling active sites from data on inhibitor molecules. J. Med. Chem. 1988, 31:1396-1406.
115. Silverman B.D., Platt D.E. Comparative molecular moment analysis (CoMMA): 3D-QSAR without molecular superposition. J. Med. Chem. 1996, 39:2129-2140.
116. Robinson D.D., Winn P.J., Lyne P.D., Richards W.G. Self-organizing molecular field analysis: a tool for structure-activity studies. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42:573-583.
117. Hahn M. Receptor surface models. 1. Definition and construction. J. Med. Chem. 1995, 38:2080-2090.
118. Hahn D., Rogers D. Receptor surface models. 2. Application to quantitative structure-activity relationships studies. J. Med. Chem. 1995, 38:2091-2102.
119. Vedani A., Dobler M. 5D-QSAR: the key for simulating induced fit?. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45:2139-2149.
120. Oprea T.I., Tropsha A. Cheminformatics and drug discovery. Drug Disc. Today Technol. 2006, 3:355-356.