What Is High-Throughput Virtual Screening? A Perspective from Organic Materials Discovery

Annual Review of Materials Research

Volumn 45, Issue , 2015, Pages 195-216

  Pyzer Knapp, Edward O ^a   Suh, Changwon ^a   Gómez Bombarelli, Rafael ^a   Aguilera Iparraguirre, Jorge ^a   Aspuru Guzik, Alán ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Big data; Computational materials design

Indexed keywords

DATA VISUALIZATION; DIGITAL LIBRARIES; THROUGHPUT;

COMPUTATIONAL MATERIALS; HIGH THROUGHPUT; HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENS; MOLECULAR LIBRARIES; ORGANIC MATERIALS; RESEARCH GROUPS; VIRTUAL SCREENING;

BIG DATA;

EID: 84942318635     PISSN: 15317331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-matsci-070214-020823     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Reymond J-L, van Deursen R, Blum LC, Ruddigkeit L. 2010. Chemical space as a source for new drugs. Med. Chem. Commun. 1:30
2. Cedar G, Persson K. 2013. How supercomputers will yield a golden age of materials science. Sci. Am., Nov. 19
3. Lipinski C, Hopkins A. 2004. Navigating chemical space for biology and medicine. Nature 432:855-61
4. Wermuth C. 2006. Selective optimization of side activities: The SOSA approach. Drug Discov. Today 11:160-64
5. Wang M, Hu X, Beratan DN, Yang W. 2006. Designing molecules by optimizing potentials. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128:3228-32
6. Balawender R,WelearegayMA, Lesiuk M, Proft FD, Geerlings P. 2013. Exploring chemical space with the alchemical derivatives. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 9:5327-40
7. Tu M, Rai BK, Mathiowetz AM, Didiuk M, Pfefferkorn JA, et al. 2012. Exploring aromatic chemical space with NEAT: Novel and Electronically equivalent Aromatic Template. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 52:1114-23
8. Virshup AM,Contreras-García J, Wipf P, YangW, BeratanDN. 2013. Stochastic voyages into uncharted chemical space produce a representative library of all possible drug-like compounds. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135:7296-303
9. Ehrlich HC, Henzler AM, Rarey M. 2013. Searching for recursively defined generic chemical patterns in nonenumerated fragment spaces. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 53:1676-88
10. Hoksza D, Skoda P, Voršilák M, Svozil D. 2014. Molpher: A software framework for systematic chemical space exploration. J. Cheminform. 6:7
11. Fink T, Bruggesser H, Reymond J-L. 2005. Virtual exploration of the small-molecule chemical universe below 160 Daltons. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 44:1504-8
12. Blum LC, Reymond J-L. 2009. 970 million druglike small molecules for virtual screening in the chemical universe database GDB-13. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131:8732-33
13. Ruddigkeit L, van Deursen R, Blum LC, Reymond J-L. 2012. Enumeration of 166 billion organic small molecules in the chemical universe database GDB-17. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 52:2864-75
14. Taniguchi M, Du H, Lindsey JS. 2011. Virtual libraries of tetrapyrrole macrocycles. Combinatorics isomers, product distributions, and data mining. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 51:2233-47
15. Yu MJ. 2011. Natural product-like virtual libraries: recursive atom-based enumeration. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 51:541-57
16. Massarotti A, Brunco A, Sorba G, Tron GC. 2014. ZINClick: A database of 16 million novel patentable, and readily synthesizable 1,4-disubstituted triazoles. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 54:396-406
17. Koutsoukas A, Paricharak S, Galloway WRJD, Spring DR, IJzerman AP, et al. 2014. How diverse are diversity assessment methods? A comparative analysis and benchmarking of molecular descriptor space. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 54:230-42
18. Roth HJ. 2005. There is no such thing as 'diversity'! Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 9:293-95
19. Riniker S, Landrum GA. 2013. Open-source platform to benchmark fingerprints for ligand-based virtual screening. J. Cheminform. 5:26
20. Maggiora G, Vogt M, Stumpfe D, Bajorath J. 2014. Molecular similarity in medicinal chemistry. J. Med. Chem. 57:3186-204
21. Gillet V, Johnson A, Mata P, Sike S, Williams P. 1993. SPROUT: A program for structure generation. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 7:127-53
22. Pearlman D, Murcko M. 1996. CONCERTS: dynamic connection of fragments as an approach to de novo ligand design. J. Med. Chem. 39:1651-63
23. Schneider G, Lee M, Stahl M, Schneider P. 2000. De novo design of molecular architectures by evolutionary assembly of drug-derived building blocks. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 14:487-94
24. Gillet V,Willett P, Fleming P, Green D. 2002. Designing focused libraries using MoSELECT. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 20:491-98
25. Vinkers H, de JM,Daeyaert F,Heeres J, Koymans L, et al. 2003. SYNOPSIS: SYNthesize andOPtimize System in Silico. J. Med. Chem. 46:2765-73
26. BrownN,McKay B, Gasteiger J. 2004. The de novo design ofmedian molecules within a property range of interest. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 18:761-71
27. Nicolaou C, Brown N, Pattichis C. 2007. Molecular optimization using computational multi-objective methods. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 10:316-24
28. Liu Q, Masek B, Smith K, Smith J. 2007. Tagged fragment method for evolutionary structure-based de novo lead generation and optimization. J. Med. Chem. 50:5392-402
29. Dey F, Caflisch A. 2008. Fragment-based de novo ligand design by multiobjective evolutionary optimization. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 48:679-90
30. Besnard J, Ruda GF, Setola V, Abecassis K, Rodriguiz RM, et al. 2012. Automated design of ligands to polypharmacological profiles. Nature 492:215-20
31. Osedach TP, Andrew TL, Bulović V. 2013. Effect of synthetic accessibility on the commercial viability of organic photovoltaics. Energy Environ. Sci. 6:711-18
32. O'Boyle NM, Campbell CM, Hutchison GR. 2011. Computational design and selection of optimal organic photovoltaic materials. J. Phys. Chem. C 115:16200-10
33. Kanal IY, Owens SG, Bechtel JS, Hutchison GR. 2013. Efficient computational screening of organic polymer photovoltaics. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 4:1613-23
34. Bertz SH. 1981. The first general index of molecular complexity. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 103:3599-601
35. Boda K, Johnson A. 2006. Molecular complexity analysis of de novo designed ligands. J. Med. Chem. 49:5869-79
36. Bonnet P. 2012. Is chemical synthetic accessibility computationally predictable for drug and lead-like molecules? A comparative assessment between medicinal and computational chemists. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 54:679-89
37. Podolyan Y, Walters MA, Karypis G. 2010. Assessing synthetic accessibility of chemical compounds using machine learning methods. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 50:979-91
38. Warr WA. 2014. A short review of chemical reaction database systems computer-aided synthesis design, reaction prediction and synthetic feasibility. Mol. Inf. 33:469-76
39. Hachmann J, Olivares-Amaya R, Atahan-Evrenk S, Amador-Bedolla C, Sánchez-Carrera RS, et al. 2011. The Harvard Clean Energy Project: large-scale computational screening and design of organic photovoltaics on the world community grid. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2:2241-51
40. Olivares-Amaya R, Amador-Bedolla C, Hachmann J, Atahan-Evrenk S, Sánchez-Carrera RS, et al. 2011. Accelerated computational discovery of high-performance materials for organic photovoltaics by means of cheminformatics. Energy Environ. Sci. 4:4849-61
41. Huskinson B, Marshak MP, Suh C, Er S, Gerhardt MR, et al. 2014. A metal-free organic-inorganic aqueous flow battery. Nature 505:195-98
42. Er S, Suh C, Marshak MP, Aspuru-Guzik A. 2015. A computational design of molecules for an allquinone redox flow battery. Chem. Sci. In press
43. Goushi K, Yoshida K, Sato K, Adachi C. 2012. Organic light-emitting diodes employing efficient reverse intersystem crossing for triplet-to-singlet state conversion. Nat. Photonics 6:253-58
44. Zhang Q, Li B, Huang S, Nomura H, Tanaka H, Adachi C. 2014. Efficient blue organic light-emitting diodes employing thermally activated delayed fluorescence. Nat. Photonics 8:326-32
45. Korth M. 2014. Large-scale virtual high-throughput screening for the identification of new battery electrolyte solvents: evaluation of electronic structure theory methods. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 16:7919-26
46. Ong SP, Richards WD, Jain A, Hautier G, Kocher M, et al. 2013. Python Materials Genomics (pymatgen): A robust open-source python library for materials analysis. Comput. Mater. Sci. 68:314-19
47. Kresse G, Furthmüller J. 1996. Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set. Comput. Mater. Sci. 6:15-50
48. Blöchl PE. 1994. Projector augmented-wave method. Phys. Rev. B 50:17953-79
49. Perdew JP, Burke K, Ernzerhof M. 1996. Generalized gradient approximation made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77:3865-68
50. Anisimov VI, Zaanen J, Andersen OK. 1991. Band theory and Mott insulators: Hubbard U instead of Stoner I. Phys. Rev. B 44:943-54
51. Jain A, Hautier G, Moore CJ, Ong SP, Fischer CC, et al. 2011. A high-throughput infrastructure for density functional theory calculations. Comput. Mater. Sci. 50:2295-310
52. Jain A, Ong SP, Hautier G, Chen W, Richards WD, et al. 2013. Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation. APL Mater. 1:011002
53. Hachmann J, Olivares-Amaya R, Jinich A, Appleton AL, Blood-ForsytheMA, et al. 2014. Lead candidates for high-performance organic photovoltaics from high-throughput quantum chemistry-The Harvard Clean Energy Project. Energy Environ. Sci. 7:698-704
54. Scharber MC, Mühlbacher D, Koppe M, Denk P, Waldauf C, et al. 2006. Design rules for donors in bulk-heterojunction solar cells-towards 10% energy-conversion efficiency. Adv. Mater. 18:789-94
55. Shockley W, Queisser HJ. 1961. Detailed balance limit of efficiency of p-n junction solar cells. J. Appl. Phys. 32:510
56. Kolossváry I, Guida WC. 1996. Low mode search. An efficient automated computational method for conformational analysis: application to cyclic and acyclic alkanes and cyclic peptides. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118:5011-19
57. Sadowski J, Gasteiger J, Klebe G. 1994. Comparison of automatic three-dimensional model builders using 639 X-ray structures. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 34:1000-8
58. Mayo SL,Olafson BD, Goddard WA. 1990. DREIDING: A generic force field for molecular simulations. J. Phys. Chem. 94:8897-909
59. Parker CN, Shamu CE, Kraybill B, Austin CP, Bajorath J. 2006. Measure, mine, model, and manipulate: The future for HTS and chemoinformatics? Drug Discov. Today 11:863-65
60. Tamura SY, Bacha PA, Gruver HS, Nutt RF. 2002. Data analysis of high-throughput screening results: application of multidomain clustering to the NCI anti-HIV data set. J. Med. Chem. 45:3082-93
61. Harper G, Pickett SD. 2006. Methods for mining HTS data. Drug Discov. Today 11:694-99
62. Ling X. 2008. High throughput screening informatics. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 11:249-57
63. Medina-Franco J, Martínez-Mayorga K, Giulianotti M, Houghten R, Pinilla C. 2008. Visualization of the chemical space in drug discovery. Comput. Aided Drug Des. 4:322-33
64. Goktug AN, Chai SC, Chen T. 2013. Drug discovery. In Pharmacology and Therapeutics, ed. S Gowder, Chapter 7. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech
65. García-Domenech R,Gálvez J, de Julián-Ortiz JV, Pogliani L. 2008. Some new trends in chemical graph theory. Chem. Rev. 108:1127-69
66. Suh C, Sieg SC, Heying MJ, Oliver JH, Maier WF, Rajan K. 2009. Visualization of high-dimensional combinatorial catalysis data. J. Comb. Chem. 11:385-92
67. Awale M, van Deursen R, Reymond J-L. 2013. MQN-Mapplet: visualization of chemical space with interactive maps of DrugBank, ChEMBL, PubChem, GDB-11, and GDB-13. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 53:509-18
68. Klopmand G. 1992. Concepts and applications of molecular similarity, by Mark A. Johnson and Gerald M. Maggiora, eds., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1990, 393 pp.
69. Price: $65.00. J. Comput. Chem. 13:539-40
70. Willett P, Barnard J, Downs G. 1998. Chemical similarity searching. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 38:983-96
71. Chen X, Reynolds C. 2002. Performance of similarity measures in 2D fragment-based similarity searching: comparison of structural descriptors and similarity coefficients. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 42:1407-14
72. Godden JW,Bajorath J. 2006.A distance function for retrieval of activemolecules from complex chemical space representations. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 46:1094-97
73. Haranczyk M, Holliday J. 2008. Comparison of similarity coefficients for clustering and compound selection. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 48:498-508
74. Coifman RR, Lafon S. 2006. Diffusion maps. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 21:5-30
75. Platts J, Butina D, Abraham M, Hersey A. 1999. Estimation of molecular linear free energy relation descriptors using a group contribution approach. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 39:835-45
76. Liu ZK, Chen LQ, Rajan K. 2006. Linking length scales via materials informatics. JOM 58:42-50
77. Balabin RM, Lomakina EI. 2011. Support vector machine regression-an alternative to artificial neural networks for the analysis of quantum chemistry data? Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13:11710
78. Balabin RM, Lomakina EI. 2009. Neural network approach to quantum-chemistry data: accurate prediction of density functional theory energies. J. Chem. Phys. 131:074104
79. Pilania G, Wang C, Jiang X, Rajasekaran S, Ramprasad R. 2013. Accelerating materials property predictions using machine learning. Sci. Rep. 3:2810
80. Rajan K, Suh C, Mendez PF. 2009. Principal component analysis and dimensional analysis as materials informatics tools to reduce dimensionality in materials science and engineering. Stat. Anal. Data Min. 1:361-71
81. Dewar MJS, Trinajstic N. 1969. Ground states of conjugated molecules-XIV. Tetrahedron 25:4529-34
82. Bajorath J. 2001. Selected concepts and investigations in compound classification molecular descriptor analysis, and virtual screening. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 41:233-45
83. Searls DB. 2005. Data integration: challenges for drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 4:45-58