Literature DB >> 19123924

How similar are similarity searching methods? A principal component analysis of molecular descriptor space.

Andreas Bender1, Jeremy L Jenkins, Josef Scheiber, Sai Chetan K Sukuru, Meir Glick, John W Davies.   

Abstract

Different molecular descriptors capture different aspects of molecular structures, but this effect has not yet been quantified systematically on a large scale. In this work, we calculate the similarity of 37 descriptors by repeatedly selecting query compounds and ranking the rest of the database. Euclidean distances between the rank-ordering of different descriptors are calculated to determine descriptor (as opposed to compound) similarity, followed by PCA for visualization. Four broad descriptor classes are identified, which are circular fingerprints; circular fingerprints considering counts; path-based and keyed fingerprints; and pharmacophoric descriptors. Descriptor behavior is much more defined by those four classes than the particular parametrization. Using counts instead of the presence/absence of fingerprints significantly changes descriptor behavior, which is crucial for performance of topological autocorrelation vectors, but not circular fingerprints. Four-point pharmacophores (piDAPH4) surprisingly lead to much higher retrieval rates than three-point pharmacophores (28.21% vs 19.15%) but still similar rank-ordering of compounds (retrieval of similar actives). Looking into individual rankings, circular fingerprints seem more appropriate than path-based fingerprints if complex ring systems or branching patterns are present; count-based fingerprints could be more suitable in databases with a large number of repeated subunits (amide bonds, sugar rings, terpenes). Information-based selection of diverse fingerprints for consensus scoring (ECFP4/TGD fingerprints) led only to marginal improvement over single fingerprint results. While it seems to be nontrivial to exploit orthogonal descriptor behavior to improve retrieval rates in consensus virtual screening, those descriptors still each retrieve different actives which corroborates the strategy of employing diverse descriptors individually in prospective virtual screening settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19123924     DOI: 10.1021/ci800249s

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


  69 in total

1.  Quantifying structure and performance diversity for sets of small molecules comprising small-molecule screening collections.

Authors:  Paul A Clemons; J Anthony Wilson; Vlado Dančík; Sandrine Muller; Hyman A Carrinski; Bridget K Wagner; Angela N Koehler; Stuart L Schreiber
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Structure and dynamics of molecular networks: a novel paradigm of drug discovery: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Peter Csermely; Tamás Korcsmáros; Huba J M Kiss; Gábor London; Ruth Nussinov
Journal:  Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 12.310

3.  Improving graphs of cycles approach to structural similarity of molecules.

Authors:  Stefi Nouleho Ilemo; Dominique Barth; Olivier David; Franck Quessette; Marc-Antoine Weisser; Dimitri Watel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-27       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Molecular fingerprint-based artificial neural networks QSAR for ligand biological activity predictions.

Authors:  Kyaw-Zeyar Myint; Lirong Wang; Qin Tong; Xiang-Qun Xie
Journal:  Mol Pharm       Date:  2012-08-31       Impact factor: 4.939

5.  Design, Synthesis, and Evaluation of Novel 3-Carboranyl-1,8-Naphthalimide Derivatives as Potential Anticancer Agents.

Authors:  Sebastian Rykowski; Dorota Gurda-Woźna; Marta Orlicka-Płocka; Agnieszka Fedoruk-Wyszomirska; Małgorzata Giel-Pietraszuk; Eliza Wyszko; Aleksandra Kowalczyk; Paweł Stączek; Andrzej Bak; Agnieszka Kiliszek; Wojciech Rypniewski; Agnieszka B Olejniczak
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-03-09       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Alpha shapes applied to molecular shape characterization exhibit novel properties compared to established shape descriptors.

Authors:  J Anthony Wilson; Andreas Bender; Taner Kaya; Paul A Clemons
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.956

7.  Frog2: Efficient 3D conformation ensemble generator for small compounds.

Authors:  Maria A Miteva; Frederic Guyon; Pierre Tufféry
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 16.971

8.  Optimal assignment methods for ligand-based virtual screening.

Authors:  Andreas Jahn; Georg Hinselmann; Nikolas Fechner; Andreas Zell
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 5.514

9.  CAESAR models for developmental toxicity.

Authors:  Antonio Cassano; Alberto Manganaro; Todd Martin; Douglas Young; Nadège Piclin; Marco Pintore; Davide Bigoni; Emilio Benfenati
Journal:  Chem Cent J       Date:  2010-07-29       Impact factor: 4.215

10.  DG-AMMOS: a new tool to generate 3d conformation of small molecules using distance geometry and automated molecular mechanics optimization for in silico screening.

Authors:  David Lagorce; Tania Pencheva; Bruno O Villoutreix; Maria A Miteva
Journal:  BMC Chem Biol       Date:  2009-11-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.