Literature DB >> 21780807

Combined application of cheminformatics- and physical force field-based scoring functions improves binding affinity prediction for CSAR data sets.

Jui-Hua Hsieh1, Shuangye Yin, Shubin Liu, Alexander Sedykh, Nikolay V Dokholyan, Alexander Tropsha.   

Abstract

The curated CSAR-NRC benchmark sets provide valuable opportunity for testing or comparing the performance of both existing and novel scoring functions. We apply two different scoring functions, both independently and in combination, to predict the binding affinity of ligands in the CSAR-NRC data sets. One reported here for the first time employs multiple chemical-geometrical descriptors of the protein-ligand interface to develop Quantitative Structure Binding Affinity Relationships (QSBAR) models. These models are then used to predict binding affinity of ligands in the external data set. Second is a physical force field-based scoring function, MedusaScore. We show that both individual scoring functions achieve statistically significant prediction accuracies with the squared correlation coefficient (R(2)) between the actual and predicted binding affinity of 0.44/0.53 (Set1/Set2) with QSBAR models and 0.34/0.47 (Set1/Set2) with MedusaScore. Importantly, we find that the combination of QSBAR models and MedusaScore into consensus scoring function affords higher prediction accuracy than any of the contributing methods achieving R(2) values of 0.45/0.58 (Set1/Set2). Furthermore, we identify several chemical features and noncovalent interactions that may be responsible for the inaccurate prediction of binding affinity for several ligands by the scoring functions employed in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21780807      PMCID: PMC3183266          DOI: 10.1021/ci200146e

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


  16 in total

Review 1.  Structure-based virtual screening protocols.

Authors:  A Good
Journal:  Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel       Date:  2001-05

2.  Predictive QSAR modeling based on diversity sampling of experimental datasets for the training and test set selection.

Authors:  Alexander Golbraikh; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  A simple physical model for binding energy hot spots in protein-protein complexes.

Authors:  Tanja Kortemme; David Baker
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-10-15       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 4.  Structure-based virtual screening: an overview.

Authors:  Paul D Lyne
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2002-10-15       Impact factor: 7.851

5.  Rational selection of training and test sets for the development of validated QSAR models.

Authors:  Alexander Golbraikh; Min Shen; Zhiyan Xiao; Yun-De Xiao; Kuo-Hsiung Lee; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2003 Feb-Apr       Impact factor: 3.686

6.  Substructural fragments: an universal language to encode reactions, molecular and supramolecular structures.

Authors:  A Varnek; D Fourches; F Hoonakker; V P Solov'ev
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 3.686

7.  Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes.

Authors:  M D Eldridge; C W Murray; T R Auton; G V Paolini; R P Mee
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 3.686

Review 8.  Best Practices for QSAR Model Development, Validation, and Exploitation.

Authors:  Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Mol Inform       Date:  2010-07-06       Impact factor: 3.353

9.  MedusaScore: an accurate force field-based scoring function for virtual drug screening.

Authors:  Shuangye Yin; Lada Biedermannova; Jiri Vondrasek; Nikolay V Dokholyan
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2008-08-02       Impact factor: 4.956

10.  Emergence of protein fold families through rational design.

Authors:  Feng Ding; Nikolay V Dokholyan
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2006-05-26       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  9 in total

1.  Predicting binding affinity of CSAR ligands using both structure-based and ligand-based approaches.

Authors:  Denis Fourches; Eugene Muratov; Feng Ding; Nikolay V Dokholyan; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 4.956

2.  Convex-PL: a novel knowledge-based potential for protein-ligand interactions deduced from structural databases using convex optimization.

Authors:  Maria Kadukova; Sergei Grudinin
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2017-09-18       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  A D3R prospective evaluation of machine learning for protein-ligand scoring.

Authors:  Jocelyn Sunseri; Matthew Ragoza; Jasmine Collins; David Ryan Koes
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2016-09-03       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  The Development of Target-Specific Pose Filter Ensembles To Boost Ligand Enrichment for Structure-Based Virtual Screening.

Authors:  Jie Xia; Jui-Hua Hsieh; Huabin Hu; Song Wu; Xiang Simon Wang
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 4.956

5.  Lessons learned in empirical scoring with smina from the CSAR 2011 benchmarking exercise.

Authors:  David Ryan Koes; Matthew P Baumgartner; Carlos J Camacho
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 4.956

6.  Scoring protein interaction decoys using exposed residues (SPIDER): a novel multibody interaction scoring function based on frequent geometric patterns of interfacial residues.

Authors:  Raed Khashan; Weifan Zheng; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2012-06-07

7.  Different combinations of atomic interactions predict protein-small molecule and protein-DNA/RNA affinities with similar accuracy.

Authors:  Raquel Dias; Bryan Kolazckowski
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2015-09-23

8.  Improving the accuracy of high-throughput protein-protein affinity prediction may require better training data.

Authors:  Raquel Dias; Bryan Kolaczkowski
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Multipose binding in molecular docking.

Authors:  Kalina Atkovska; Sergey A Samsonov; Maciej Paszkowski-Rogacz; M Teresa Pisabarro
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 5.923

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.