» Articles » PMID: 30524275

QSAR-Based Virtual Screening: Advances and Applications in Drug Discovery

Overview
Journal Front Pharmacol
Date 2018 Dec 8
PMID 30524275
Citations 116
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Virtual screening (VS) has emerged in drug discovery as a powerful computational approach to screen large libraries of small molecules for new hits with desired properties that can then be tested experimentally. Similar to other computational approaches, VS intention is not to replace or assays, but to speed up the discovery process, to reduce the number of candidates to be tested experimentally, and to rationalize their choice. Moreover, VS has become very popular in pharmaceutical companies and academic organizations due to its time-, cost-, resources-, and labor-saving. Among the VS approaches, quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) analysis is the most powerful method due to its high and fast throughput and good hit rate. As the first preliminary step of a QSAR model development, relevant chemogenomics data are collected from databases and the literature. Then, chemical descriptors are calculated on different levels of representation of molecular structure, ranging from 1D to D, and then correlated with the biological property using machine learning techniques. Once developed and validated, QSAR models are applied to predict the biological property of novel compounds. Although the experimental testing of computational hits is not an inherent part of QSAR methodology, it is highly desired and should be performed as an ultimate validation of developed models. In this mini-review, we summarize and critically analyze the recent trends of QSAR-based VS in drug discovery and demonstrate successful applications in identifying perspective compounds with desired properties. Moreover, we provide some recommendations about the best practices for QSAR-based VS along with the future perspectives of this approach.

Citing Articles

One size does not fit all: revising traditional paradigms for assessing accuracy of QSAR models used for virtual screening.

Wellnitz J, Jain S, Hochuli J, Maxfield T, Muratov E, Tropsha A J Cheminform. 2025; 17(1):7.

PMID: 39819357 PMC: 11740363. DOI: 10.1186/s13321-025-00948-y.


Deep Multitask Learning-Driven Discovery of New Compounds Targeting .

de Almeida Santos E, Lemos J, Dos Santos Carvalho A, Mendonca de Melo F, Pereira E, Moreira-Filho J ACS Omega. 2025; 9(52):51271-51284.

PMID: 39758621 PMC: 11696749. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.4c07994.


Prediction of human pharmacokinetic parameters incorporating SMILES information.

Kwon J, Han J, Kim M, Kim S, Lee D, Kim M Arch Pharm Res. 2024; 47(12):914-923.

PMID: 39589671 DOI: 10.1007/s12272-024-01520-2.


Application of Machine Learning in the Development of Fourth Degree Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship Model for Triclosan Analogs Tested against 3D7.

Marques de Souza Guimaraes R, Vieira I, Zanchi F, Caceres R, Zanchi F ACS Omega. 2024; 9(44):44436-44447.

PMID: 39524644 PMC: 11541538. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.4c05768.


A Survey on Computational Methods in Drug Discovery for Neurodegenerative Diseases.

Vicidomini C, Fontanella F, DAlessandro T, Roviello G Biomolecules. 2024; 14(10).

PMID: 39456263 PMC: 11506269. DOI: 10.3390/biom14101330.


References
1.
Muratov E, Varlamova E, Artemenko A, Polishchuk P, Kuzmin V . Existing and Developing Approaches for QSAR Analysis of Mixtures. Mol Inform. 2016; 31(3-4):202-21. DOI: 10.1002/minf.201100129. View

2.
Mueller R, Dawson E, Meiler J, Rodriguez A, Chauder B, Bates B . Discovery of 2-(2-benzoxazoyl amino)-4-aryl-5-cyanopyrimidine as negative allosteric modulators (NAMs) of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGlu₅): from an artificial neural network virtual screen to an in vivo tool compound. ChemMedChem. 2012; 7(3):406-14. PMC: 3517057. DOI: 10.1002/cmdc.201100510. View

3.
Phillips M, Burrows J, Manyando C, Hooft van Huijsduijnen R, Van Voorhis W, Wells T . Malaria. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017; 3:17050. DOI: 10.1038/nrdp.2017.50. View

4.
Mitchell J . Machine learning methods in chemoinformatics. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Mol Sci. 2014; 4(5):468-481. PMC: 4180928. DOI: 10.1002/wcms.1183. View

5.
Goh G, Hodas N, Vishnu A . Deep learning for computational chemistry. J Comput Chem. 2017; 38(16):1291-1307. DOI: 10.1002/jcc.24764. View