Optimal Assignment Methods for Ligand-based Virtual Screening

Overview

Journal J Cheminform

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Chemistry

Date 2010 Feb 13

PMID 20150995

Citations 29

Authors

Andreas Jahn

Georg Hinselmann

Nikolas Fechner

Andreas Zell

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Ligand-based virtual screening experiments are an important task in the early drug discovery stage. An ambitious aim in each experiment is to disclose active structures based on new scaffolds. To perform these "scaffold-hoppings" for individual problems and targets, a plethora of different similarity methods based on diverse techniques were published in the last years. The optimal assignment approach on molecular graphs, a successful method in the field of quantitative structure-activity relationships, has not been tested as a ligand-based virtual screening method so far.

Results: We evaluated two already published and two new optimal assignment methods on various data sets. To emphasize the "scaffold-hopping" ability, we used the information of chemotype clustering analyses in our evaluation metrics. Comparisons with literature results show an improved early recognition performance and comparable results over the complete data set. A new method based on two different assignment steps shows an increased "scaffold-hopping" behavior together with a good early recognition performance.

Conclusion: The presented methods show a good combination of chemotype discovery and enrichment of active structures. Additionally, the optimal assignment on molecular graphs has the advantage to investigate and interpret the mappings, allowing precise modifications of internal parameters of the similarity measure for specific targets. All methods have low computation times which make them applicable to screen large data sets.

Citing Articles

Virtual Screening-Based Study of Novel Anti-Cancer Drugs Targeting G-Quadruplex.

Ouyang R, Liu J, Wang S, Zhang W, Feng K, Liu C Pharmaceutics. 2023; 15(5).

PMID: 37242656 PMC: 10222998. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15051414.

Maximizing the Performance of Similarity-Based Virtual Screening Methods by Generating Synergy from the Integration of 2D and 3D Approaches.

Fan N, Hirte S, Kirchmair J Int J Mol Sci. 2022; 23(14).

PMID: 35887097 PMC: 9322642. DOI: 10.3390/ijms23147747.

Virtual Combinatorial Chemistry and Pharmacological Screening: A Short Guide to Drug Design.

Suay-Garcia B, Bueso-Bordils J, Falco A, Anton-Fos G, Aleman-Lopez P Int J Mol Sci. 2022; 23(3).

PMID: 35163543 PMC: 8836228. DOI: 10.3390/ijms23031620.

Attacking COVID-19 Progression Using Multi-Drug Therapy for Synergetic Target Engagement.

Coban M, Morrison J, Maharjan S, Hernandez Medina D, Li W, Zhang Y Biomolecules. 2021; 11(6).

PMID: 34071060 PMC: 8224684. DOI: 10.3390/biom11060787.

LINGO-DL: a text-based approach for molecular similarity searching.

Abdo A, Pupin M J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2021; 35(5):657-665.

PMID: 33797669 DOI: 10.1007/s10822-021-00383-9.

References

Irwin J . Community benchmarks for virtual screening. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2008; 22(3-4):193-9. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-008-9189-4. View

Korb O, Stutzle T, Exner T . Empirical scoring functions for advanced protein-ligand docking with PLANTS. J Chem Inf Model. 2009; 49(1):84-96. DOI: 10.1021/ci800298z. View

Jain A, Nicholls A . Recommendations for evaluation of computational methods. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2008; 22(3-4):133-9. PMC: 2311385. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-008-9196-5. View

Cavasotto C, Orry A . Ligand docking and structure-based virtual screening in drug discovery. Curr Top Med Chem. 2007; 7(10):1006-14. DOI: 10.2174/156802607780906753. View

Guha R, Howard M, Hutchison G, Murray-Rust P, Rzepa H, Steinbeck C . The Blue Obelisk-interoperability in chemical informatics. J Chem Inf Model. 2006; 46(3):991-8. PMC: 4878861. DOI: 10.1021/ci050400b. View

Bender A, Mussa H, Glen R, Reiling S . Similarity searching of chemical databases using atom environment descriptors (MOLPRINT 2D): evaluation of performance. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2004; 44(5):1708-18. DOI: 10.1021/ci0498719. View

Mackey M, Melville J . Better than random? The chemotype enrichment problem. J Chem Inf Model. 2009; 49(5):1154-62. DOI: 10.1021/ci8003978. View

Kirchmair J, Markt P, Distinto S, Wolber G, Langer T . Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection--what can we learn from earlier mistakes?. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2008; 22(3-4):213-28. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-007-9163-6. View

Triballeau N, Acher F, Brabet I, Pin J, Bertrand H . Virtual screening workflow development guided by the "receiver operating characteristic" curve approach. Application to high-throughput docking on metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 4. J Med Chem. 2005; 48(7):2534-47. DOI: 10.1021/jm049092j. View

10.

Gillet V, Willett P, Bradshaw J . Similarity searching using reduced graphs. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2003; 43(2):338-45. DOI: 10.1021/ci025592e. View

11.

Nicholls A . What do we know and when do we know it?. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2008; 22(3-4):239-55. PMC: 2270923. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-008-9170-2. View

12.

Coutsias E, Seok C, Dill K . Rotational superposition and least squares: the SVD and quaternions approaches yield identical results. Reply to the preceding comment by G. Kneller. J Comput Chem. 2005; 26(15):1663-5. DOI: 10.1002/jcc.20316. View

13.

Rarey M, Dixon J . Feature trees: a new molecular similarity measure based on tree matching. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 1998; 12(5):471-90. DOI: 10.1023/a:1008068904628. View

14.

Hawkins P, Warren G, Skillman A, Nicholls A . How to do an evaluation: pitfalls and traps. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2008; 22(3-4):179-90. PMC: 2270916. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-007-9166-3. View

15.

Cramer R, Patterson D, Bunce J . Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J Am Chem Soc. 2011; 110(18):5959-67. DOI: 10.1021/ja00226a005. View

16.

Berman H, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat T, Weissig H . The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999; 28(1):235-42. PMC: 102472. DOI: 10.1093/nar/28.1.235. View

17.

Steinbeck C, Hoppe C, Kuhn S, Floris M, Guha R, Willighagen E . Recent developments of the chemistry development kit (CDK) - an open-source java library for chemo- and bioinformatics. Curr Pharm Des. 2006; 12(17):2111-20. DOI: 10.2174/138161206777585274. View

18.

Ballester P, Finn P, Richards W . Ultrafast shape recognition: evaluating a new ligand-based virtual screening technology. J Mol Graph Model. 2009; 27(7):836-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmgm.2009.01.001. View

19.

Steinbeck C, Han Y, Kuhn S, Horlacher O, Luttmann E, Willighagen E . The Chemistry Development Kit (CDK): an open-source Java library for Chemo- and Bioinformatics. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2003; 43(2):493-500. PMC: 4901983. DOI: 10.1021/ci025584y. View

20.

von Korff M, Freyss J, Sander T . Flexophore, a new versatile 3D pharmacophore descriptor that considers molecular flexibility. J Chem Inf Model. 2008; 48(4):797-810. DOI: 10.1021/ci700359j. View