Literature DB >> 21604699

Using consensus-shape clustering to identify promiscuous ligands and protein targets and to choose the right query for shape-based virtual screening.

Violeta I Pérez-Nueno1, David W Ritchie.   

Abstract

Ligand-based shape matching approaches have become established as important and popular virtual screening (VS) techniques. However, despite their relative success, many authors have discussed how best to choose the initial query compounds and which of their conformations should be used. Furthermore, it is increasingly the case that pharmaceutical companies have multiple ligands for a given target and these may bind in different ways to the same pocket. Conversely, a given ligand can sometimes bind to multiple targets, and this is clearly of great importance when considering drug side-effects. We recently introduced the notion of spherical harmonic-based "consensus shapes" to help deal with these questions. Here, we apply a consensus shape clustering approach to the 40 protein-ligand targets in the DUD data set using PARASURF/PARAFIT. Results from clustering show that in some cases the ligands for a given target are split into two subgroups which could suggest they bind to different subsites of the same target. In other cases, our clustering approach sometimes groups together ligands from different targets, and this suggests that those ligands could bind to the same targets. Hence spherical harmonic-based clustering can rapidly give cross-docking information while avoiding the expense of performing all-against-all docking calculations. We also report on the effect of the query conformation on the performance of shape-based screening of the DUD data set and the potential gain in screening performance by using consensus shapes calculated in different ways. We provide details of our analysis of shape-based screening using both PARASURF/PARAFIT and ROCS, and we compare the results obtained with shape-based and conventional docking approaches using MSSH/SHEF and GOLD. The utility of each type of query is analyzed using commonly reported statistics such as enrichment factors (EF) and receiver-operator-characteristic (ROC) plots as well as other early performance metrics.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21604699     DOI: 10.1021/ci100492r

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  Computational prediction of metabolism: sites, products, SAR, P450 enzyme dynamics, and mechanisms.

Authors:  Johannes Kirchmair; Mark J Williamson; Jonathan D Tyzack; Lu Tan; Peter J Bond; Andreas Bender; Robert C Glen
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 4.956

2.  Stereoselective virtual screening of the ZINC database using atom pair 3D-fingerprints.

Authors:  Mahendra Awale; Xian Jin; Jean-Louis Reymond
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 5.514

3.  Importance of consensus region of multiple-ligand templates in a virtual screening method.

Authors:  Tatsuya Okuno; Koya Kato; Shintaro Minami; Tomoki P Terada; Masaki Sasai; George Chikenji
Journal:  Biophys Physicobiol       Date:  2016-07-14

4.  Quantitative Structure-activity Relationship (QSAR) Models for Docking Score Correction.

Authors:  Yoshifumi Fukunishi; Satoshi Yamasaki; Isao Yasumatsu; Koh Takeuchi; Takashi Kurosawa; Haruki Nakamura
Journal:  Mol Inform       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 3.353

Review 5.  Advances in the Development of Shape Similarity Methods and Their Application in Drug Discovery.

Authors:  Ashutosh Kumar; Kam Y J Zhang
Journal:  Front Chem       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 5.221

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.