Application of Shape Similarity in Pose Selection and Virtual Screening in CSARdock2014 Exercise

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 56, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 965-973

  Kumar, Ashutosh ^a   Zhang, Kam Y J ^a  

^a RIKEN   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACIDS; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; ENZYMES;

3D SHAPE SIMILARITIES; COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION; EXPERIMENTAL ACTIVITIES; METHYLTRANSFERASES; SPLEEN TYROSINE KINASE; TESTING ENVIRONMENT; VIRTUAL SCREENING; X RAY CRYSTAL STRUCTURES;

LIGANDS;

COMPUTER INTERFACE; MOLECULAR DOCKING; PRECLINICAL STUDY; PROCEDURES; PROTEIN CONFORMATION;

DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; MOLECULAR DOCKING SIMULATION; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 84976376865     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.5b00279     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Tanrikulu, Y.; Krüger, B.; Proschak, E. The Holistic Integration of Virtual Screening in Drug Discovery Drug Discovery Today 2013, 18, 358-364 10.1016/j.drudis.2013.01.007
2. Walters, W. P.; Stahl, M. T.; Murcko, M. A. Virtual Screening-an Overview Drug Discovery Today 1998, 3, 160-178 10.1016/S1359-6446(97)01163-X
3. Kumar, A.; Zhang, K. Y. J. Hierarchical Virtual Screening Approaches in Small Molecule Drug Discovery Methods 2015, 71, 26-37 10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.07.007
4. Lavecchia, A.; Di Giovanni, C. Virtual Screening Strategies in Drug Discovery: A Critical Review Curr. Med. Chem. 2013, 20, 2839-2860 10.2174/09298673113209990001
5. Muegge, I. Synergies of Virtual Screening Approaches Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 2008, 8, 927-933 10.2174/138955708785132792
6. Muegge, I.; Oloff, S. Advances in Virtual Screening Drug Discovery Today: Technol. 2006, 3, 405-411 10.1016/j.ddtec.2006.12.002
7. Drwal, M. N.; Griffith, R. Combination of Ligand- and Structure-Based Methods in Virtual Screening Drug Discovery Today: Technol. 2013, 10, e395-e401 10.1016/j.ddtec.2013.02.002
8. Sliwoski, G.; Kothiwale, S.; Meiler, J.; Lowe, E. W. Computational Methods in Drug Discovery Pharmacol. Rev. 2013, 66, 334-395 10.1124/pr.112.007336
9. Sukumar, N.; Das, S. Current Trends in Virtual High Throughput Screening Using Ligand-Based and Structure-Based Methods Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screening 2011, 14, 872-888 10.2174/138620711797537120
10. Fukunishi, Y. Structure-Based Drug Screening and Ligand-Based Drug Screening with Machine Learning Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screening 2009, 12, 397-408 10.2174/138620709788167890
11. Maggiora, G.; Vogt, M.; Stumpfe, D.; Bajorath, J. Molecular Similarity in Medicinal Chemistry J. Med. Chem. 2014, 57, 3186-3204 10.1021/jm401411z
12. Stumpfe, D.; Bajorath, J. Similarity Searching Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science 2011, 1, 260-282 10.1002/wcms.23
13. Caporuscio, F.; Tafi, A. Pharmacophore Modelling: A Forty Year Old Approach and Its Modern Synergies Curr. Med. Chem. 2011, 18, 2543-2553 10.2174/092986711795933669
14. Guha, R. On Exploring Structure-Activity Relationships Methods Mol. Biol. 2013, 993, 81-94 10.1007/978-1-62703-342-8-6
15. Melville, J. L.; Burke, E. K.; Hirst, J. D. Machine Learning in Virtual Screening Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screening 2009, 12, 332-343 10.2174/138620709788167980
16. Gertrudes, J. C.; Maltarollo, V. G.; Silva, R. A.; Oliveira, P. R.; Honorio, K. M.; da Silva, A. B. Machine Learning Techniques and Drug Design Curr. Med. Chem. 2012, 19, 4289-4297 10.2174/092986712802884259
17. Yuriev, E.; Agostino, M.; Ramsland, P. A. Challenges and Advances in Computational Docking: 2009 in Review J. Mol. Recognit. 2011, 24, 149-164 10.1002/jmr.1077
18. Yuriev, E.; Ramsland, P. A. Latest Developments in Molecular Docking: 2010-2011 in Review J. Mol. Recognit. 2013, 26, 215-239 10.1002/jmr.2266
19. Yuriev, E.; Holien, J.; Ramsland, P. A. Improvements, Trends, and New Ideas in Molecular Docking: 2012-2013 in Review J. Mol. Recognit. 2015, n/a 10.1002/jmr.2471
20. Pirhadi, S.; Shiri, F.; Ghasemi, J. B. Methods and Applications of Structure Based Pharmacophores in Drug Discovery Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2013, 13, 1036-1047 10.2174/1568026611313090006
21. Sanders, M. P. A.; McGuire, R.; Roumen, L.; de Esch, I. J. P.; de Vlieg, J.; Klomp, J. P. G.; de Graaf, C. From the Protein's Perspective: The Benefits and Challenges of Protein Structure-Based Pharmacophore Modeling MedChemComm 2012, 3, 28-38 10.1039/C1MD00210D
22. Kutchukian, P. S.; Shakhnovich, E. I. De Novo Design: Balancing Novelty and Confined Chemical Space Expert Opin. Drug Discovery 2010, 5, 789-812 10.1517/17460441.2010.497534
23. Loving, K.; Alberts, I.; Sherman, W. Computational Approaches for Fragment-Based and De Novo Design Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2010, 10, 14-32 10.2174/156802610790232305
24. Scior, T.; Bender, A.; Tresadern, G.; Medina-Franco, J. L.; Martínez-Mayorga, K.; Langer, T.; Cuanalo-Contreras, K.; Agrafiotis, D. K. Recognizing Pitfalls in Virtual Screening: A Critical Review J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2012, 52, 867-881 10.1021/ci200528d
25. Schneider, G. Virtual Screening: An Endless Staircase? Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2010, 9, 273-276 10.1038/nrd3139
26. Huang, S.-Y.; Grinter, S. Z.; Zou, X. Scoring Functions and Their Evaluation Methods for Protein-Ligand Docking: Recent Advances and Future Directions Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2010, 12, 12899-12908 10.1039/c0cp00151a
27. Wang, J. C.; Lin, J. H. Scoring Functions for Prediction of Protein-Ligand Interactions Curr. Pharm. Des. 2013, 19, 2174-2182 10.2174/1381612811319120005
28. Li, Y.; Han, L.; Liu, Z.; Wang, R. Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions on an Updated Benchmark: 2. Evaluation Methods and General Results J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2014, 54, 1717-1736 10.1021/ci500081m
29. Li, Y.; Liu, Z.; Li, J.; Han, L.; Liu, J.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, R. Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions on an Updated Benchmark: 1. Compilation of the Test Set J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2014, 54, 1700-1716 10.1021/ci500080q
30. Cheng, T.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Liu, Z.; Wang, R. Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions on a Diverse Test Set J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 1079-1093 10.1021/ci9000053
31. 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, 5912-5931 10.1021/jm050362n
32. Liu, S.; Fu, R.; Zhou, L. H.; Chen, S. P. Application of Consensus Scoring and Principal Component Analysis for Virtual Screening against Beta-Secretase (Bace-1) PLoS One 2012, 7, e38086 10.1371/journal.pone.0038086
33. Zhong, S.; Zhang, Y.; Xiu, Z. Rescoring Ligand Docking Poses Curr. Opin. Drug Discovery Dev. 2010, 13, 326-334
34. Bar-Haim, S.; Aharon, A.; Ben-Moshe, T.; Marantz, Y.; Senderowitz, H. Selex-Cs: A New Consensus Scoring Algorithm for Hit Discovery and Lead Optimization J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 623-633 10.1021/ci800335j
35. Teramoto, R.; Fukunishi, H. Supervised Consensus Scoring for Docking and Virtual Screening J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 526-534 10.1021/ci6004993
36. Oda, A.; Tsuchida, K.; Takakura, T.; Yamaotsu, N.; Hirono, S. Comparison of Consensus Scoring Strategies for Evaluating Computational Models of Protein-Ligand Complexes J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 380-391 10.1021/ci050283k
37. Kalaszi, A.; Szisz, D.; Imre, G.; Polgar, T. Screen3d: A Novel Fully Flexible High-Throughput Shape-Similarity Search Method J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2014, 54, 1036-1049 10.1021/ci400620f
38. Sato, T.; Yuki, H.; Takaya, D.; Sasaki, S.; Tanaka, A.; Honma, T. Application of Support Vector Machine to Three-Dimensional Shape-Based Virtual Screening Using Comprehensive Three-Dimensional Molecular Shape Overlay with Known Inhibitors J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2012, 52, 1015-1026 10.1021/ci200562p
39. Liu, X.; Jiang, H.; Li, H. Shafts: A Hybrid Approach for 3d Molecular Similarity Calculation. 1. Method and Assessment of Virtual Screening J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2011, 51, 2372-2385 10.1021/ci200060s
40. Hawkins, P. C. D.; Skillman, A. G.; Nicholls, A. Comparison of Shape-Matching and Docking as Virtual Screening Tools J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 74-82 10.1021/jm0603365
41. Wei, N.-N.; Hamza, A. Sabre: Ligand/Structure-Based Virtual Screening Approach Using Consensus Molecular-Shape Pattern Recognition J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2014, 54, 338-346 10.1021/ci4005496
42. Rocs 3.2.0.4. Openeye Scientific Software. http://www.eyesopen.com (accessed July 2015).
43. Vainio, M. J.; Puranen, J. S.; Johnson, M. S. Shaep: Molecular Overlay Based on Shape and Electrostatic Potential J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 492-502 10.1021/ci800315d
44. Kumar, A.; Ito, A.; Takemoto, M.; Yoshida, M.; Zhang, K. Y. J. Identification of 1,2,5-Oxadiazoles as a New Class of Senp2 Inhibitors Using Structure Based Virtual Screening J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2014, 54, 870-880 10.1021/ci4007134
45. Hevener, K. E.; Mehboob, S.; Su, P.-C.; Truong, K.; Boci, T.; Deng, J.; Ghassemi, M.; Cook, J. L.; Johnson, M. E. Discovery of a Novel and Potent Class of F. Tularensis Enoyl-Reductase (Fabi) Inhibitors by Molecular Shape and Electrostatic Matching J. Med. Chem. 2012, 55, 268-279 10.1021/jm201168g
46. Naylor, E.; Arredouani, A.; Vasudevan, S. R.; Lewis, A. M.; Parkesh, R.; Mizote, A.; Rosen, D.; Thomas, J. M.; Izumi, M.; Ganesan, A.; Galione, A.; Churchill, G. C. Identification of a Chemical Probe for Naadp by Virtual Screening Nat. Chem. Biol. 2009, 5, 220-226 10.1038/nchembio.150
47. Vasudevan, S. R.; Singh, N.; Churchill, G. C. Scaffold Hopping with Virtual Screening from Ip3 to a Drug-Like Partial Agonist of the Inositol Trisphosphate Receptor ChemBioChem 2014, 15, 2774-2782 10.1002/cbic.201402440
48. Rush, T. S., 3rd; Grant, J. A.; Mosyak, L.; Nicholls, A. A Shape-Based 3-D Scaffold Hopping Method and Its Application to a Bacterial Protein-Protein Interaction J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 1489-1495 10.1021/jm040163o
49. Pan, X.; Tan, N.; Zeng, G.; Huang, H.; Yan, H. 3d Qsar Studies on Ketoamides of Human Cathepsin K Inhibitors Based on Two Different Alignment Methods Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2010, 45, 667-681 10.1016/j.ejmech.2009.11.010
50. Crisan, L.; Pacureanu, L.; Avram, S.; Bora, A.; Avram, S.; Kurunczi, L. Pls and Shape-Based Similarity Analysis of Maleimides - Gsk-3 Inhibitors J. Enzyme Inhib. Med. Chem. 2014, 29, 599-610 10.3109/14756366.2013.833196
51. Hybrid 3.0.1. Openeye Scientific Software. http://www.eyesopen.com (accessed July 2015).
52. Posit 3.1.0.5. Openeye Scientific Software. http://www.eyesopen.com (accessed July 2015).
53. Smith, R. D.; Dunbar, J. B.; Ung, P. M.-U.; Esposito, E. X.; Yang, C.-Y.; Wang, S.; Carlson, H. A. Csar Benchmark Exercise of 2010: Combined Evaluation across All Submitted Scoring Functions J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2011, 51, 2115-2131 10.1021/ci200269q
54. Damm-Ganamet, K. L.; Smith, R. D.; Dunbar, J. B., Jr.; Stuckey, J. A.; Carlson, H. A. Csar Benchmark Exercise 2011-2012: Evaluation of Results from Docking and Relative Ranking of Blinded Congeneric Series J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2013, 53, 1853-1870 10.1021/ci400025f
55. Dunbar, J. B., Jr.; Smith, R. D.; Damm-Ganamet, K. L.; Ahmed, A.; Esposito, E. X.; Delproposto, J.; Chinnaswamy, K.; Kang, Y. N.; Kubish, G.; Gestwicki, J. E.; Stuckey, J. A.; Carlson, H. A. Csar Data Set Release 2012: Ligands, Affinities, Complexes, and Docking Decoys J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2013, 53, 1842-1852 10.1021/ci4000486
56. Ewing, T. A.; Makino, S.; Skillman, A. G.; Kuntz, I. Dock 4.0: Search Strategies for Automated Molecular Docking of Flexible Molecule Databases J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 411-428 10.1023/A:1011115820450
57. Bernstein, F. C.; Koetzle, T. F.; Williams, G. J.; Meyer, E. F., Jr.; Brice, M. D.; Rodgers, J. R.; Kennard, O.; Shimanouchi, T.; Tasumi, M. The Protein Data Bank: A Computer-Based Archival File for Macromolecular Structures J. Mol. Biol. 1977, 112, 535-542 10.1016/S0022-2836(77)80200-3
58. Maestro, Version 9.2; Schrödinger, LLC., New York, 2011.
59. Ligprep, Version 2.5; Schrödinger, LLC., New York, 2011.
60. Jorgensen, W. L.; Tirado-Rives, J. The Opls [Optimized Potentials for Liquid Simulations] Potential Functions for Proteins, Energy Minimizations for Crystals of Cyclic Peptides and Crambin J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 1657-1666 10.1021/ja00214a001
61. Jorgensen, W. L.; Maxwell, D. S.; Tirado-Rives, J. Development and Testing of the Opls All-Atom Force Field on Conformational Energetics and Properties of Organic Liquids J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 11225-11236 10.1021/ja9621760
62. 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, 1739-1749 10.1021/jm0306430
63. Friesner, R. A.; Murphy, R. B.; Repasky, M. P.; Frye, L. L.; Greenwood, J. R.; Halgren, T. A.; Sanschagrin, P. C.; Mainz, D. T. Extra Precision Glide: Docking and Scoring Incorporating a Model of Hydrophobic Enclosure for Protein-Ligand Complexes J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 6177-6196 10.1021/jm051256o
64. 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, 1750-1759 10.1021/jm030644s
65. Glide, Version 5.7; Schrödinger, LLC, New York, 2011.
66. Seal, A.; Yogeeswari, P.; Sriram, D.; Consortium, O.; Wild, D. J. Enhanced Ranking of Pknb Inhibitors Using Data Fusion Methods J. Cheminf. 2013, 5, 2 10.1186/1758-2946-5-2
67. Sastry, G. M.; Inakollu, V. S.; Sherman, W. Boosting Virtual Screening Enrichments with Data Fusion: Coalescing Hits from Two-Dimensional Fingerprints, Shape, and Docking J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2013, 53, 1531-1542 10.1021/ci300463g
68. Community Structure-Activity Resource. http://CSARdock.org (accessed August 2015).
69. 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, 455-461 10.1002/jcc.21334
70. Neudert, G.; Klebe, G. Dsx: A Knowledge-Based Scoring Function for the Assessment of Protein-Ligand Complexes J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2011, 51, 2731-2745 10.1021/ci200274q
71. McGann, M. R.; Almond, H. R.; Nicholls, A.; Grant, J. A.; Brown, F. K. Gaussian Docking Functions Biopolymers 2003, 68, 76-90 10.1002/bip.10207
72. Gehlhaar, D. K.; Verkhivker, G. M.; Rejto, P. A.; Sherman, C. J.; Fogel, D. R.; Fogel, L. J.; Freer, S. T. Molecular Recognition of the Inhibitor Ag-1343 by Hiv-1 Protease: Conformationally Flexible Docking by Evolutionary Programming Chem. Biol. 1995, 2, 317-324 10.1016/1074-5521(95)90050-0
73. Baxter, C. A.; Murray, C. W.; Clark, D. E.; Westhead, D. R.; Eldridge, M. D. Flexible Docking Using Tabu Search and an Empirical Estimate of Binding Affinity Proteins: Struct., Funct., Genet. 1998, 33, 367-382 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0134(19981115)33:3<367::AID-PROT6>3.0.CO;2-W
74. Eldridge, M.; Murray, C.; Auton, T.; Paolini, G.; Mee, R. Empirical Scoring Functions: I. The Development of a Fast Empirical Scoring Function to Estimate the Binding Affinity of Ligands in Receptor Complexes J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 425-445 10.1023/A:1007996124545