Literature DB >> 16045308

Consensus scoring criteria for improving enrichment in virtual screening.

Jinn-Moon Yang1, Yen-Fu Chen, Tsai-Wei Shen, Bruce S Kristal, D Frank Hsu.   

Abstract

MOTIVATION: Virtual screening of molecular compound libraries is a potentially powerful and inexpensive method for the discovery of novel lead compounds for drug development. The major weakness of virtual screening-the inability to consistently identify true positives (leads)-is likely due to our incomplete understanding of the chemistry involved in ligand binding and the subsequently imprecise scoring algorithms. It has been demonstrated that combining multiple scoring functions (consensus scoring) improves the enrichment of true positives. Previous efforts at consensus scoring have largely focused on empirical results, but they have yet to provide a theoretical analysis that gives insight into real features of combinations and data fusion for virtual screening.
RESULTS: We demonstrate that combining multiple scoring functions improves the enrichment of true positives only if (a) each of the individual scoring functions has relatively high performance and (b) the individual scoring functions are distinctive. Notably, these two prediction variables are previously established criteria for the performance of data fusion approaches using either rank or score combinations. This work, thus, establishes a potential theoretical basis for the probable success of data fusion approaches to improve yields in in silico screening experiments. Furthermore, it is similarly established that the second criterion (b) can, in at least some cases, be functionally defined as the area between the rank versus score plots generated by the two (or more) algorithms. Because rank-score plots are independent of the performance of the individual scoring function, this establishes a second theoretically defined approach to determining the likely success of combining data from different predictive algorithms. This approach is, thus, useful in practical settings in the virtual screening process when the performance of at least two individual scoring functions (such as in criterion a) can be estimated as having a high likelihood of having high performance, even if no training sets are available. We provide initial validation of this theoretical approach using data from five scoring systems with two evolutionary docking algorithms on four targets, thymidine kinase, human dihydrofolate reductase, and estrogen receptors of antagonists and agonists. Our procedure is computationally efficient, able to adapt to different situations, and scalable to a large number of compounds as well as to a greater number of combinations. Results of the experiment show a fairly significant improvement (vs single algorithms) in several measures of scoring quality, specifically "goodness-of-hit" scores, false positive rates, and "enrichment". This approach (available online at http://gemdock.life. nctu.edu.tw/dock/download.php) has practical utility for cases where the basic tools are known or believed to be generally applicable, but where specific training sets are absent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16045308     DOI: 10.1021/ci050034w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Inf Model        ISSN: 1549-9596            Impact factor:   4.956


  44 in total

1.  AB-Bind: Antibody binding mutational database for computational affinity predictions.

Authors:  Sarah Sirin; James R Apgar; Eric M Bennett; Amy E Keating
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2015-11-06       Impact factor: 6.725

2.  Towards predictive docking at aminergic G-protein coupled receptors.

Authors:  Jan Jakubík; Esam E El-Fakahany; Vladimír Doležal
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 1.810

3.  Differentiation of AmpC beta-lactamase binders vs. decoys using classification kNN QSAR modeling and application of the QSAR classifier to virtual screening.

Authors:  Jui-Hua Hsieh; Xiang S Wang; Denise Teotico; Alexander Golbraikh; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-03-13       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  VSDMIP: virtual screening data management on an integrated platform.

Authors:  Rubén Gil-Redondo; Jorge Estrada; Antonio Morreale; Fernando Herranz; Javier Sancho; Angel R Ortiz
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 3.686

5.  Experimental versus predicted affinities for ligand binding to estrogen receptor: iterative selection and rescoring of docked poses systematically improves the correlation.

Authors:  James S Wright; James M Anderson; Hooman Shadnia; Tony Durst; John A Katzenellenbogen
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2013-08-24       Impact factor: 3.686

6.  Rational creation and systematic analysis of cervical cancer kinase-inhibitor binding profile.

Authors:  Min Han; Dongdong Sun
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2019-06-15       Impact factor: 3.686

7.  Ligand supported homology modeling and docking evaluation of CCR2: docked pose selection by consensus scoring.

Authors:  Jong-Hoon Kim; Jee Woong Lim; Seung-Woo Lee; Kyoungrak Kim; Kyoung Tai No
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2011-01-07       Impact factor: 1.810

8.  SiMMap: a web server for inferring site-moiety map to recognize interaction preferences between protein pockets and compound moieties.

Authors:  Yen-Fu Chen; Kai-Cheng Hsu; Shen-Rong Lin; Wen-Ching Wang; Yu-Chi Huang; Jinn-Moon Yang
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 16.971

9.  Modulating G-protein coupled receptor/G-protein signal transduction by small molecules suggested by virtual screening.

Authors:  Christina M Taylor; Yaniv Barda; Oleg G Kisselev; Garland R Marshall
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2008-08-16       Impact factor: 7.446

10.  Virtual screening to identify lead inhibitors for bacterial NAD synthetase (NADs).

Authors:  Whitney Beysselance Moro; Zhengrong Yang; Tasha A Kane; Christie G Brouillette; Wayne J Brouillette
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem Lett       Date:  2009-02-12       Impact factor: 2.823

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.