Literature DB >> 19434835

Comparison of molecular fingerprint methods on the basis of biological profile data.

Andreas Steffen1, Thierry Kogej, Christian Tyrchan, Ola Engkvist.   

Abstract

In this study we evaluated a set of molecular fingerprint methods with respect to their capability to reproduce similarities in the biological activity space. The evaluation presented in this paper is therefore different from many other fingerprint studies, in which the enrichment of active compounds binding to the same target as selected query structures was studied. Conversely, our data set was extracted from the BioPrint database, which contains uniformly derived biological activity profiles of mainly marketed drugs for a range of biological assays relevant for the pharmaceutical industry. We compared calculated molecular fingerprint similarity values between all compound pairs of the data set with the corresponding similarities in the biological activity space and additionally analyzed agreements of generated clusterings. A closer analysis of the compound pairs with a high biological activity similarity revealed that fingerprint methods such as CHEMGPS or TRUST4, which describe global features of a molecule such as physicochemical properties and pharmacophore patterns, might be better suited to describe similarity of biological activity profiles than purely structural fingerprint methods. It is therefore suggested that the usage of these fingerprint methods could increase the probability of finding molecules with a similar biological activity profile but yet a different chemical structure.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19434835     DOI: 10.1021/ci800326z

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


  15 in total

1.  Drug-drug interaction through molecular structure similarity analysis.

Authors:  Santiago Vilar; Rave Harpaz; Eugenio Uriarte; Lourdes Santana; Raul Rabadan; Carol Friedman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Crystal structure-based virtual screening for fragment-like ligands of the human histamine H(1) receptor.

Authors:  Chris de Graaf; Albert J Kooistra; Henry F Vischer; Vsevolod Katritch; Martien Kuijer; Mitsunori Shiroishi; So Iwata; Tatsuro Shimamura; Raymond C Stevens; Iwan J P de Esch; Rob Leurs
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2011-11-07       Impact factor: 7.446

3.  QSAR model based on weighted MCS trees approach for the representation of molecule data sets.

Authors:  Bernardo Palacios-Bejarano; Gonzalo Cerruela García; Irene Luque Ruiz; Miguel Ángel Gómez-Nieto
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  Computational Methods and Deep Learning for Elucidating Protein Interaction Networks.

Authors:  Dhvani Sandip Vora; Yogesh Kalakoti; Durai Sundar
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2023

5.  Selecting, Acquiring, and Using Small Molecule Libraries for High-Throughput Screening.

Authors:  Sivaraman Dandapani; Gerard Rosse; Noel Southall; Joseph M Salvino; Craig J Thomas
Journal:  Curr Protoc Chem Biol       Date:  2012-09-01

Review 6.  Rational methods for the selection of diverse screening compounds.

Authors:  David J Huggins; Ashok R Venkitaraman; David R Spring
Journal:  ACS Chem Biol       Date:  2011-02-15       Impact factor: 5.100

7.  Fragment library screening reveals remarkable similarities between the G protein-coupled receptor histamine H₄ and the ion channel serotonin 5-HT₃A.

Authors:  Mark H P Verheij; Chris de Graaf; Gerdien E de Kloe; Saskia Nijmeijer; Henry F Vischer; Rogier A Smits; Obbe P Zuiderveld; Saskia Hulscher; Linda Silvestri; Andrew J Thompson; Jacqueline E van Muijlwijk-Koezen; Sarah C R Lummis; Rob Leurs; Iwan J P de Esch
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem Lett       Date:  2011-07-02       Impact factor: 2.823

8.  Enhancing adverse drug event detection in electronic health records using molecular structure similarity: application to pancreatitis.

Authors:  Santiago Vilar; Rave Harpaz; Lourdes Santana; Eugenio Uriarte; Carol Friedman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Limits of ligand selectivity from docking to models: in silico screening for A(1) adenosine receptor antagonists.

Authors:  Peter Kolb; Khai Phan; Zhan-Guo Gao; Adam C Marko; Andrej Sali; Kenneth A Jacobson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A fast topological analysis algorithm for large-scale similarity evaluations of ligands and binding pockets.

Authors:  Mohammad ElGamacy; Luc Van Meervelt
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 5.514

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.