Literature DB >> 25058446

Prediction of binding affinity and efficacy of thyroid hormone receptor ligands using QSAR and structure-based modeling methods.

Regina Politi1, Ivan Rusyn2, Alexander Tropsha3.   

Abstract

The thyroid hormone receptor (THR) is an important member of the nuclear receptor family that can be activated by endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC). Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models have been developed to facilitate the prioritization of THR-mediated EDC for the experimental validation. The largest database of binding affinities available at the time of the study for ligand binding domain (LBD) of THRβ was assembled to generate both continuous and classification QSAR models with an external accuracy of R(2)=0.55 and CCR=0.76, respectively. In addition, for the first time a QSAR model was developed to predict binding affinities of antagonists inhibiting the interaction of coactivators with the AF-2 domain of THRβ (R(2)=0.70). Furthermore, molecular docking studies were performed for a set of THRβ ligands (57 agonists and 15 antagonists of LBD, 210 antagonists of the AF-2 domain, supplemented by putative decoys/non-binders) using several THRβ structures retrieved from the Protein Data Bank. We found that two agonist-bound THRβ conformations could effectively discriminate their corresponding ligands from presumed non-binders. Moreover, one of the agonist conformations could discriminate agonists from antagonists. Finally, we have conducted virtual screening of a chemical library compiled by the EPA as part of the Tox21 program to identify potential THRβ-mediated EDCs using both QSAR models and docking. We concluded that the library is unlikely to have any EDC that would bind to the THRβ. Models developed in this study can be employed either to identify environmental chemicals interacting with the THR or, conversely, to eliminate the THR-mediated mechanism of action for chemicals of concern.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Docking; Endocrine disrupting chemicals; Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationships modeling; Thyroid hormone receptor; Virtual screening

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25058446      PMCID: PMC4814443          DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2014.07.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol        ISSN: 0041-008X            Impact factor:   4.219


  54 in total

Review 1.  Thyroid effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals.

Authors:  Malene Boas; Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen; Katharina M Main
Journal:  Mol Cell Endocrinol       Date:  2011-09-10       Impact factor: 4.102

2.  y-Randomization and its variants in QSPR/QSAR.

Authors:  Christoph Rücker; Gerta Rücker; Markus Meringer
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2007-09-20       Impact factor: 4.956

3.  Synthesis and preliminary characterization of a novel antiarrhythmic compound (KB130015) with an improved toxicity profile compared with amiodarone.

Authors:  Bo Carlsson; B N Singh; Marcel Temciuc; Stefan Nilsson; Yi-Lin Li; Charlotta Mellin; Johan Malm
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2002-01-31       Impact factor: 7.446

4.  Synthesis and evaluation of methylsulfonylnitrobenzamides (MSNBAs) as inhibitors of the thyroid hormone receptor-coactivator interaction.

Authors:  Jong Yeon Hwang; Ramy R Attia; Angela K Carrillo; Michele C Connelly; R Kiplin Guy
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem Lett       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 2.823

5.  Cloning and characterization of two novel thyroid hormone receptor beta isoforms.

Authors:  G R Williams
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.272

Review 6.  Thyroid hormone analogues for the treatment of metabolic disorders: new potential for unmet clinical needs?

Authors:  Timothy J Shoemaker; Tatsuyoshi Kono; Cary N Mariash; Carmella Evans-Molina
Journal:  Endocr Pract       Date:  2012 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.443

Review 7.  Functions of thyroid hormone receptors in mice.

Authors:  D Forrest; B Vennström
Journal:  Thyroid       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 6.568

8.  Identification of putative estrogen receptor-mediated endocrine disrupting chemicals using QSAR- and structure-based virtual screening approaches.

Authors:  Liying Zhang; Alexander Sedykh; Ashutosh Tripathi; Hao Zhu; Antreas Afantitis; Varnavas D Mouchlis; Georgia Melagraki; Ivan Rusyn; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 4.219

Review 9.  Review: Endocrine disrupting chemicals and immune responses: a focus on bisphenol-A and its potential mechanisms.

Authors:  James A Rogers; Luanne Metz; V Wee Yong
Journal:  Mol Immunol       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 4.407

10.  Directory of useful decoys, enhanced (DUD-E): better ligands and decoys for better benchmarking.

Authors:  Michael M Mysinger; Michael Carchia; John J Irwin; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 7.446

View more
  6 in total

1.  Alarms about structural alerts.

Authors:  Vinicius Alves; Eugene Muratov; Stephen Capuzzi; Regina Politi; Yen Low; Rodolpho Braga; Alexey V Zakharov; Alexander Sedykh; Elena Mokshyna; Sherif Farag; Carolina Andrade; Victor Kuz'min; Denis Fourches; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Green Chem       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 10.182

2.  Discriminating agonist and antagonist ligands of the nuclear receptors using 3D-pharmacophores.

Authors:  Nathalie Lagarde; Solenne Delahaye; Jean-François Zagury; Matthieu Montes
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 5.514

3.  Evaluating Chemicals for Thyroid Disruption: Opportunities and Challenges with in Vitro Testing and Adverse Outcome Pathway Approaches.

Authors:  Pamela D Noyes; Katie Paul Friedman; Patience Browne; Jonathan T Haselman; Mary E Gilbert; Michael W Hornung; Stan Barone; Kevin M Crofton; Susan C Laws; Tammy E Stoker; Steven O Simmons; Joseph E Tietge; Sigmund J Degitz
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2019-09-05       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 4.  The Next Generation of Risk Assessment Multi-Year Study-Highlights of Findings, Applications to Risk Assessment, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Ila Cote; Melvin E Andersen; Gerald T Ankley; Stanley Barone; Linda S Birnbaum; Kim Boekelheide; Frederic Y Bois; Lyle D Burgoon; Weihsueh A Chiu; Douglas Crawford-Brown; Kevin M Crofton; Michael DeVito; Robert B Devlin; Stephen W Edwards; Kathryn Z Guyton; Dale Hattis; Richard S Judson; Derek Knight; Daniel Krewski; Jason Lambert; Elizabeth Anne Maull; Donna Mendrick; Gregory M Paoli; Chirag Jagdish Patel; Edward J Perkins; Gerald Poje; Christopher J Portier; Ivan Rusyn; Paul A Schulte; Anton Simeonov; Martyn T Smith; Kristina A Thayer; Russell S Thomas; Reuben Thomas; Raymond R Tice; John J Vandenberg; Daniel L Villeneuve; Scott Wesselkamper; Maurice Whelan; Christine Whittaker; Ronald White; Menghang Xia; Carole Yauk; Lauren Zeise; Jay Zhao; Robert S DeWoskin
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2016-04-19       Impact factor: 9.031

5.  Comparison of Quantitative and Qualitative (Q)SAR Models Created for the Prediction of Ki and IC50 Values of Antitarget Inhibitors.

Authors:  Alexey A Lagunin; Maria A Romanova; Anton D Zadorozhny; Natalia S Kurilenko; Boris V Shilov; Pavel V Pogodin; Sergey M Ivanov; Dmitry A Filimonov; Vladimir V Poroikov
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 5.810

Review 6.  Chemical Screening of Nuclear Receptor Modulators.

Authors:  Mari Ishigami-Yuasa; Hiroyuki Kagechika
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 5.923

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.