Proteochemometric modeling in a Bayesian framework

Journal of Cheminformatics

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Cortes Ciriano, Isidro ^a   Van Westen, Gerard J P ^b   Lenselink, Eelke Bart ^c   Murrell, Daniel S ^d   Bender, Andreas ^d   Malliavin, Thérèse ^a  

^a INSTITUT PASTEUR   (France)

^b WELLCOME TRUST SANGER INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^c LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Adenosine receptors; Applicability domain; Bayesian inference; Chemogenomics; Gaussian process; GPCRs; Proteochemometrics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84902923405     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17582946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1758-2946-6-35     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Chemogenomic approaches to drug discovery. Caron PR, Mullican MD, Mashal RD, Wilson KP, Su MS, Murcko MA, Curr Opin Chem Biol 2001 5 4 464 470
2. The role of chemogenomics in the pharmaceutical industry. Bieler M, Koeppen H, Drug Dev Res 2012 73 7 357 364
3. From in silico target prediction to multi-target drug design: current databases, methods and applications. Koutsoukas A, Simms B, Kirchmair J, Bond PJ, Whitmore AV, Zimmer S, Young MP, Jenkins JL, Glick M, Glen RC, Bender A, J Proteomics 2011 74 12 2554 2574
4. Concepts and Applications of Molecular Similarity New York: Wiley-Interscience, Johnson MA, Maggiora GM, 1990
5. Predicting new molecular targets for known drugs. Keiser MJ, Setola V, Irwin JJ, Laggner C, Abbas AI, Hufeisen SJ, Jensen NH, Kuijer MB, Matos RC, Tran TB, Whaley R, Glennon RA, Hert J, Thomas KLH, Edwards DD, Shoichet BK, Roth BL, Nature 2009 462 7270 175 181
6. Proteochemometric modeling as a tool to design selective compounds and for extrapolating to novel targets. van Westen GJP, Wegner JK, IJzerman AP, van Vlijmen HWT, Bender A, Med Chem Commun 2011 2 16 30
7. In silico target predictions: defining a benchmarking data set and comparison of performance of the multiclass naïve bayes and parzen-rosenblatt window. Koutsoukas A, Lowe R, KalantarMotamedi Y, Mussa HY, Klaffke W, Mitchell JBO, Glen RC, Bender A, J Chem Inf Model 2013 53 8 1957 1966
8. Large-scale prediction and testing of drug activity on side-effect targets. Lounkine E, Keiser MJ, Whitebread S, Mikhailov D, Hamon J, Jenkins JL, Lavan P, Weber E, Doak AK, Cote S, Shoichet BK, Urban L, Nature 2012 486 7403 361 367
9. Predicting new indications for approved drugs using a proteochemometric method. Dakshanamurthy S, Issa NT, Assefnia S, Seshasayee A, Peters OJ, Madhavan S, Uren A, Brown ML, Byers SW, J Med Chem 2012 55 15 6832 6848
10. A ligand's-eye view of protein similarity. van Westen GJP, Overington JP, Nat Methods 2013 10 2 116 117
11. Chemogenomics: Looking at biology through the lens of chemistry. Doddareddy MR, van Westen GJP, van der Horst E, Peironcely JE, Corthals F, Ijzerman AP, Emmerich M, Jenkins JL, Bender A, Stat Anal Data Min 2009 2 3 149 160
12. Chemogenomics approaches for receptor deorphanization and extensions of the chemogenomics concept to phenotypic space. van der Horst E, Peironcely JE, van Westen GJ, van den Hoven OO, Galloway WR, Spring DR, Wegner JK, van Vlijmen HW, Ijzerman AP, Overington JP, Bender A, Curr Top Med Chem 2011 11 15 1964 1977
13. Computational methods in developing quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR): a review. Dudek AZ, Arodz T, Gálvez J, Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 2006 9 3 213 228
14. Which compound to select in lead optimization? prospectively validated proteochemometric models guide preclinical development. van Westen GJP, Wegner JK, Geluykens P, Kwanten L, Vereycken I, Peeters A, IJzerman AP, van Vlijmen HWT, Bender A, PLoS ONE 2011 6 11 27518
15. Significantly improved HIV inhibitor efficacy prediction employing proteochemometric models generated from antivirogram data. van Westen GJ, Hendriks A, Wegner JK, Ijzerman AP, van Vlijmen HW, Bender A, PLoS Comput Biol 2013 9 2 1002899
16. Identifying novel adenosine receptor ligands by simultaneous proteochemometric modeling of rat and human bioactivity data. van Westen GJP, van den Hoven OO, van der Pijl R, Mulder-Krieger T, de Vries H, Wegner JK, Ijzerman AP, van Vlijmen HWT, Bender A, J Med Chem 2012 55 16 7010 7020
17. Current status of methods for defining the applicability domain of (quantitative) structure-activity relationships. the report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 52. Netzeva TI, Worth A, Aldenberg T, Benigni R, Cronin MTD, Gramatica P, Jaworska JS, Kahn S, Klopman G, Marchant CA, Myatt G, Nikolova-Jeliazkova N, Patlewicz GY, Perkins R, Roberts D, Schultz T, Stanton DW, van de Sandt JJM, Tong W, Veith G, Yang C, ATLA, Altern Lab Anim 2005 33 2 155 173 (Pubitemid 40686385)
18. Can we estimate the accuracy of ADME-Tox predictions? Tetko IV, Bruneau P, Mewes H-W, Rohrer DC, Poda GI, Drug Discov Today 2006 11 700 707 (Pubitemid 44038632)
19. An overview of advances in reliability estimation of individual predictions in machine learning. Bosnic Z, Kononenko I, IDA 2009 13 2 385 401
20. Comparison of different approaches to define the applicability domain of QSAR models. Sahigara F, Mansouri K, Ballabio D, Mauri A, Consonni V, Todeschini R, Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 2012 17 5 4791 4810
21. Extended-connectivity fingerprints. Rogers D, Hahn M, J Chem Inf Model 2010 50 5 742 754
22. The experimental uncertainty of heterogeneous public Ki data. Kramer C, Kalliokoski T, Gedeck P, Vulpetti A, J Med Chem 2012 55 11 5165 5173
23. Comparability of mixed IC50 data-a statistical analysis. Kalliokoski T, Kramer C, Vulpetti A, Gedeck P, PloS ONE 2013 8 4 61007
24. Qsars, data and error in the modern age of drug discovery. Kramer C, Lewis R, Curr Top Med Chem 2012 12 17 1896 1902
25. Estimating error rates in bioactivity databases. Tiikkainen P, Bellis L, Light Y, Franke L, J Chem Inf Model 2013 53 10 2499 2505
26. Healthy skepticism: assessing realistic model performance. Brown SP, Muchmore SW, Hajduk PJ, Drug Discov Today 2009 14 420 427
27. Beware of q2! Golbraikh A, Tropsha A, J Mol Graph Model 2002 20 4 269 276
28. Predictive quantitative structure-activity relationships modeling. Tropsha A, Golbraikh A, Handbook Chemoinformatics Algorithms 2010 33 211
29. The importance of being earnest: validation is the absolute essential for successful application and interpretation of QSPR models. Tropsha A, Gramatica P, Gombar VK, QSAR Comb Sci 2003 22 1 69 77 (Pubitemid 36717473)
30. Quantitative structure-activity relationship studies using gaussian processes. Burden FR, J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2001 41 3 830 835
31. Gaussian processes: a method for automatic QSAR modeling of ADME properties. Obrezanova O, Csányi G, Gola JMR, Segall MD, J Chem Inf Model 2007 47 5 1847 1857 (Pubitemid 47561132)
32. Gaussian processes for classification: QSAR modeling of ADMET and target activity. Obrezanova O, Segall MD, J Chem Inf Model 2010 50 6 1053 1061
33. Accurate solubility prediction with error bars for electrolytes: a machine learning approach. Schwaighofer A, Schroeter T, Mika S, Laub J, ter Laak A, Sülzle D, Ganzer U, Heinrich N, Müller K-R, J Chem Inf Model 2007 47 2 407 424 (Pubitemid 46620969)
34. Gaussian process: an alternative approach for qsam modeling of peptides. Zhou P, Chen X, Wu Y, Shang Z, Amino Acids 2010 38 1 199 212
35. Modeling and prediction of binding affinities between the human amphiphysin sh3 domain and its peptide ligands using genetic algorithm-gaussian processes. Zhou P, Tian F, Chen X, Shang Z, J Pept Sci 2008 90 6 792 802
36. Characterization of the binding profile of peptide to transporter associated with antigen processing (tap) using gaussian process regression. Ren Y, Wu B, Pan Y, Lv F, Kong X, Luo X, Li Y, Yang Q, Comput Biol Med 2011 41 9 865 870
37. Navigating the protein fitness landscape with gaussian processes. Romero PA, Krause A, Arnold FH, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013 110 3 193 201
38. Combining on-chip synthesis of a focused combinatorial library with computational target prediction reveals imidazopyridine gpcr ligands. Reutlinger M, Rodrigues T, Schneider P, Schneider G, Angew Chem Int Ed 2014 53 2 582 585
39. ChEMBL: a large-scale bioactivity database for drug discovery. Gaulton A, Bellis LJ, Bento AP, Chambers J, Davies M, Hersey A, Light Y, McGlinchey S, Michalovich D, Al-Lazikani B, Overington JP, Nucleic Acids Res 2011 40 D1 1100 1107
40. Definition of the G protein-coupled receptor transmembrane bundle binding pocket and calculation of receptor similarities for drug design. Gloriam DE, Foord SM, Blaney FE, Garland SL, J Med Chem 2009 52 14 4429 4442
41. Proteochemometrics analysis of substrate interactions with dengue virus NS3 proteases. Prusis P, Lapins M, Yahorava S, Petrovska R, Niyomrattanakit P, Katzenmeier G, Wikberg JES, Bioorg Med Chem 2008 16 20 9369 9377
42. Circular fingerprints: flexible molecular descriptors with applications from physical chemistry to ADME. Glem RC, Bender A, Arnby CH, Carlsson L, Boyer S, Smith J, IDrugs 2006 9 3 199 204
43. Scitegic Accelrys Software Inc, Pipeline Pilot Student Edition, version 6.1.5 San Diego: Scitegic Accelrys Software Inc. 2007
44. How similar are similarity searching methods? A principal component analysis of molecular descriptor space. Bender A, Jenkins JL, Scheiber J, Sukuru SCK, Glick M, Davies JW, J Chem Inf Model 2009 49 1 108 119
45. Vegan: community ecology package. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H, 2013 R package version 2.0-9
46. R Core Team, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2013
47. New chemical descriptors relevant for the design of biologically active peptides. A multivariate characterization of 87 amino acids. Sandberg M, Eriksson L, Jonsson J, Sjöström M, Wold S, J Med Chem 1998 41 14 2481 2491 (Pubitemid 28321898)
48. Rasmussen CE, Williams CKI, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning Cambridge: Mit Press 2006
49. Classes of kernels for machine learning: a statistics perspective. Genton MG, J Mach Learn Res 2002 2 299 312
50. Support vector machines and kernels for computational biology. Ben-Hur A, Ong CS, Sonnenburg S, Schölkopf B, Rätsch G, PLoS Comput Biol 2008 4 10 1000173
51. Schur complements in statistics and probability. Puntanen S, Styan GPH, The Schur Complement and Its Applications. Numerical Methods and Algorithms USA: Springer, Zhang F, 2005 163 226
52. MacKay DJC, Information Theory, Inference and Learning Algorithms UK: Cambridge University Press 2003
53. Neal RM, Bayesian Learning for Neural Network New York: Springer 1996
54. Nested sampling for general Bayesian computation. Skilling J, Bayesian Anal 2006 1 4 833 859
55. Gaussian processes for machine learning (gpml) toolbox. Rasmussen CE, Nickisch H, J Mach Learn Res 2010 11 3011 3015
56. Building predictive models in r using the caret package. Kuhn M, J Stat Softw 2008 28 5 1 26
57. kernlab-An S4 package for kernel methods in R. Karatzoglou A, Smola A, Hornik K, Zeileis A, J Stat Softw 2004 11 9 1 20 (Pubitemid 40068148)
58. MATLAB, Version 7.15.0 (R2013b) Natick: The MathWorks Inc. 2013
59. Infpy package for python. Reid J, version 0.4.13
60. Statistical variation in progressive scrambling. Clark R, Fox P, J Comput Aided Mol Des 2004 18 563 576
61. Design and evaluation of substrate-based octapeptide and non substrate-based tetrapeptide inhibitors of dengue virus ns2b-ns3 proteases. Prusis P, Junaid M, Petrovska R, Yahorava S, Yahorau A, Katzenmeier G, Lapins M, Wikberg JES, Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2013 434 4 767 772
62. Computational chemogenomics: is it more than inductive transfer? Brown JB, Okuno Y, Marcou G, Varnek A, Horvath D, J Comput Aided Mol Des 2014 28 6 1 22
63. Proteochemometric modeling of the bioactivity spectra of HIV-1 protease inhibitors by introducing protein-ligand interaction fingerprint. Huang Q, Jin H, Liu Q, Wu Q, Kang H, Cao Z, Zhu R, PLoS ONE 2012 7 7 41698
64. Screening of selective histone deacetylase inhibitors by proteochemometric modeling. Wu D, Huang Q, Zhang Y, Zhang Q, Liu Q, Gao J, Cao Z, Zhu R, BMC Bioinformatics 2012 13 1 212
65. Support vector machine based on universal kernel function and its application in quantitative structure-toxicity relationship model. Qifu Z, Haifeng H, Youzheng Z, Guodong S, Proceedings of the 2009 International Forum on Information Technology and Applications-Volume 03. IFITA 09 Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society 2009 708 711
66. Three-dimensional quantitative similarity-activity relationships (3D QSiAR) from SEAL similarity matrices. Kubinyi H, Hamprecht FA, Mietzner T, J Med Chem 1998 41 14 2553 2564 (Pubitemid 28321904)
67. Gpcr structure and activation: an essential role for the first extracellular loop in activating the adenosine a2b receptor. Peeters MC, van Westen GJP, Guo D, Wisse LE, Müller CE, Beukers MW, IJzerman AP, FASEB J 2011 25 2 632 643
68. Importance of the extracellular loops in g protein-coupled receptors for ligand recognition and receptor activation. Peeters MC, van Westen GJP, Li Q, IJzerman AP, Trends Pharmacol Sci 2011 32 1 35 42
69. The 2.6 angstrom crystal structure of a human a2a adenosine receptor bound to an antagonist. Jaakola V-P, Griffith MT, Hanson MA, Cherezov V, Chien EYT, Lane JR, IJzerman AP, Stevens RC, Science 2008 322 5905 1211 1217
70. Chemical substructures that enrich for biological activity. Klekota J, Roth FP, Bioinformatics 2008 24 21 2518 2525
71. The drug designerś guide to selectivity. Gottfries J, Chemometr Intell Lab 2006 83 2 148 156
72. Study on human GPCR-inhibitor interactions by proteochemometric modeling. Gao J, Huang Q, Wu D, Zhang Q, Zhang Y, Chen T, Liu Q, Zhu R, Cao Z, He Y, Gene 2013 518 1 124 131
73. Global analysis of small molecule binding to related protein targets. Kruger FA, Overington JP, PLoS Comput Biol 2012 8 1 1002333
74. International union of pharmacology. XXV. nomenclature and classification of adenosine receptors. Fredholm BB, IJzerman AP, Jacobson KA, Klotz KN, Linden J, Pharmacol Rev 2001 53 4 527 552 (Pubitemid 33136237)
75. Structure discovery in nonparametric regression through compositional kernel search. Duvenaud D, Lloyd JR, Grosse R, Tenenbaum JB, Ghahramani Z, ArXiv e-prints 2013 1302.4922 [ http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.4922 ]
76. Evolution of covariance functions for gaussian process regression using genetic programming. Kronberger G, Kommenda M, CoRR 2013 abs/1305.3794 [ http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3794 ]
77. Parallelizing Gaussian process calculations in R. Paciorek CJ, Lipshitz B, Zhuo W, Kaufman CG, Thomas RC, Prabhat, arXiv e-print 1305.4886, 2013. [ http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4886 ]
78. Sparse on-line Gaussian processes. Csato L, Opper M, Neural Comput 2002 14 3 641 668
79. A Bayesian committee machine. Tresp V, Neural Comput 2000 12 11 2719 2741
80. Proteochemometric modeling of HIV protease susceptibility. Lapins M, Eklund M, Spjuth O, Prusis P, Wikberg JE, BMC Bioinformatics 2008 9 1 181
81. Services for prediction of drug susceptibility for HIV proteases and reverse transcriptases at the HIV drug research centre. Spjuth O, Eklund M, Lapins M, Junaid M, Wikberg JES, Bioinformatics 2011 27 12 1719 1720