Literature DB >> 15139752

Finding more needles in the haystack: A simple and efficient method for improving high-throughput docking results.

Anthony E Klon1, Meir Glick, Mathis Thoma, Pierre Acklin, John W Davies.   

Abstract

The technology underpinning high-throughput docking (HTD) has developed over the past few years to where it has become a vital tool in modern drug discovery. Although the performance of various docking algorithms is adequate, the ability to accurately and consistently rank compounds using a scoring function remains problematic. We show that by employing a simple machine learning method (naïve Bayes) it is possible to significantly overcome this deficiency. Compounds from the Available Chemical Directory (ACD), along with known active compounds, were docked into two protein targets using three software packages. In cases where HTD alone was able to show some enrichment, the application of naïve Bayes was able to improve upon the enrichment. The application of this methodology to enrich HTD results can be carried out without a priori knowledge of the activity of compounds and results in superior enrichment of known actives compared to the use of scoring methods alone.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15139752     DOI: 10.1021/jm030363k

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Chem        ISSN: 0022-2623            Impact factor:   7.446


  15 in total

1.  Development and implementation of (Q)SAR modeling within the CHARMMing web-user interface.

Authors:  Iwona E Weidlich; Yuri Pevzner; Benjamin T Miller; Igor V Filippov; H Lee Woodcock; Bernard R Brooks
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 3.376

2.  Surrogate docking: structure-based virtual screening at high throughput speed.

Authors:  Sukjoon Yoon; Andrew Smellie; David Hartsough; Anton Filikov
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Feature-map vectors: a new class of informative descriptors for computational drug discovery.

Authors:  Gregory A Landrum; Julie E Penzotti; Santosh Putta
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2007-01-05       Impact factor: 3.686

Review 4.  Cheminformatics analysis and learning in a data pipelining environment.

Authors:  Moises Hassan; Robert D Brown; Shikha Varma-O'brien; David Rogers
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2006-09-22       Impact factor: 2.943

5.  Reverse fingerprinting, similarity searching by group fusion and fingerprint bit importance.

Authors:  Chris Williams
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2006-09-21       Impact factor: 2.943

Review 6.  Computational methods in drug discovery.

Authors:  Gregory Sliwoski; Sandeepkumar Kothiwale; Jens Meiler; Edward W Lowe
Journal:  Pharmacol Rev       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 25.468

7.  Bayesian models trained with HTS data for predicting β-haematin inhibition and in vitro antimalarial activity.

Authors:  Kathryn J Wicht; Jill M Combrinck; Peter J Smith; Timothy J Egan
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem       Date:  2014-12-20       Impact factor: 3.641

8.  Anti-HIV small-molecule binding in the peptide subpocket of the CXCR4:CVX15 crystal structure.

Authors:  Bryan D Cox; Anthony R Prosser; Brooke M Katzman; Ana A Alcaraz; Dennis C Liotta; Lawrence J Wilson; James P Snyder
Journal:  Chembiochem       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 3.164

9.  Predicting cytotoxicity from heterogeneous data sources with Bayesian learning.

Authors:  Sarah R Langdon; Joanna Mulgrew; Gaia V Paolini; Willem P van Hoorn
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2010-12-09       Impact factor: 5.514

10.  A method to enhance the hit ratio by a combination of structure-based drug screening and ligand-based screening.

Authors:  Katsumi Omagari; Daisuke Mitomo; Satoru Kubota; Haruki Nakamura; Yoshifumi Fukunishi
Journal:  Adv Appl Bioinform Chem       Date:  2008-08-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.