Literature DB >> 25481478

Benchmarking methods and data sets for ligand enrichment assessment in virtual screening.

Jie Xia1, Ermias Lemma Tilahun2, Terry-Elinor Reid2, Liangren Zhang3, Xiang Simon Wang4.   

Abstract

Retrospective small-scale virtual screening (VS) based on benchmarking data sets has been widely used to estimate ligand enrichments of VS approaches in the prospective (i.e. real-world) efforts. However, the intrinsic differences of benchmarking sets to the real screening chemical libraries can cause biased assessment. Herein, we summarize the history of benchmarking methods as well as data sets and highlight three main types of biases found in benchmarking sets, i.e. "analogue bias", "artificial enrichment" and "false negative". In addition, we introduce our recent algorithm to build maximum-unbiased benchmarking sets applicable to both ligand-based and structure-based VS approaches, and its implementations to three important human histone deacetylases (HDACs) isoforms, i.e. HDAC1, HDAC6 and HDAC8. The leave-one-out cross-validation (LOO CV) demonstrates that the benchmarking sets built by our algorithm are maximum-unbiased as measured by property matching, ROC curves and AUCs.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analogue bias; Artificial enrichment; Benchmarking methodology; Decoy sets; Ligand-based virtual screening; Structure-based virtual screening

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25481478      PMCID: PMC4278665          DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.11.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods        ISSN: 1046-2023            Impact factor:   3.608


  108 in total

1.  Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions.

Authors:  Philippe Ferrara; Holger Gohlke; Daniel J Price; Gerhard Klebe; Charles L Brooks
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-06-03       Impact factor: 7.446

2.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy.

Authors:  Richard A Friesner; Jay L Banks; Robert B Murphy; Thomas A Halgren; Jasna J Klicic; Daniel T Mainz; Matthew P Repasky; Eric H Knoll; Mee Shelley; Jason K Perry; David E Shaw; Perry Francis; Peter S Shenkin
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-03-25       Impact factor: 7.446

3.  Rapid context-dependent ligand desolvation in molecular docking.

Authors:  Michael M Mysinger; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2010-09-27       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 4.  Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection--what can we learn from earlier mistakes?

Authors:  Johannes Kirchmair; Patrick Markt; Simona Distinto; Gerhard Wolber; Thierry Langer
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 3.686

5.  Impact of benchmark data set topology on the validation of virtual screening methods: exploration and quantification by spatial statistics.

Authors:  Sebastian G Rohrer; Knut Baumann
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 4.956

6.  Pharmacophore-based virtual screening versus docking-based virtual screening: a benchmark comparison against eight targets.

Authors:  Zhi Chen; Hong-lin Li; Qi-jun Zhang; Xiao-guang Bao; Kun-qian Yu; Xiao-min Luo; Wei-liang Zhu; Hua-liang Jiang
Journal:  Acta Pharmacol Sin       Date:  2009-11-23       Impact factor: 6.150

Review 7.  Three-dimensional pharmacophore methods in drug discovery.

Authors:  Andrew R Leach; Valerie J Gillet; Richard A Lewis; Robin Taylor
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 7.446

8.  Multiple structures for virtual ligand screening: defining binding site properties-based criteria to optimize the selection of the query.

Authors:  Nesrine Ben Nasr; Hélène Guillemain; Nathalie Lagarde; Jean-François Zagury; Matthieu Montes
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 4.956

9.  HDAC2 negatively regulates memory formation and synaptic plasticity.

Authors:  Ji-Song Guan; Stephen J Haggarty; Emanuela Giacometti; Jan-Hermen Dannenberg; Nadine Joseph; Jun Gao; Thomas J F Nieland; Ying Zhou; Xinyu Wang; Ralph Mazitschek; James E Bradner; Ronald A DePinho; Rudolf Jaenisch; Li-Huei Tsai
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  PubChem's BioAssay Database.

Authors:  Yanli Wang; Jewen Xiao; Tugba O Suzek; Jian Zhang; Jiyao Wang; Zhigang Zhou; Lianyi Han; Karen Karapetyan; Svetlana Dracheva; Benjamin A Shoemaker; Evan Bolton; Asta Gindulyte; Stephen H Bryant
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  13 in total

1.  Pharmacophore-based virtual screening of catechol-o-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitors to combat Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Chirag N Patel; John J Georrge; Krunal M Modi; Moksha B Narechania; Daxesh P Patel; Frank J Gonzalez; Himanshu A Pandya
Journal:  J Biomol Struct Dyn       Date:  2017-12-27

2.  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

3.  Maximal Unbiased Benchmarking Data Sets for Human Chemokine Receptors and Comparative Analysis.

Authors:  Jie Xia; Terry-Elinor Reid; Song Wu; Liangren Zhang; Xiang Simon Wang
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 4.956

4.  Three-Dimensional Convolutional Neural Networks and a Cross-Docked Data Set for Structure-Based Drug Design.

Authors:  Paul G Francoeur; Tomohide Masuda; Jocelyn Sunseri; Andrew Jia; Richard B Iovanisci; Ian Snyder; David R Koes
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2020-09-10       Impact factor: 4.956

5.  Combinatorial Pharmacophore-Based 3D-QSAR Analysis and Virtual Screening of FGFR1 Inhibitors.

Authors:  Nannan Zhou; Yuan Xu; Xian Liu; Yulan Wang; Jianlong Peng; Xiaomin Luo; Mingyue Zheng; Kaixian Chen; Hualiang Jiang
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  A Thoroughly Validated Virtual Screening Strategy for Discovery of Novel HDAC3 Inhibitors.

Authors:  Huabin Hu; Jie Xia; Dongmei Wang; Xiang Simon Wang; Song Wu
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 5.923

7.  Ligand-Based Virtual Screening Using Graph Edit Distance as Molecular Similarity Measure.

Authors:  Carlos Garcia-Hernandez; Alberto Fernández; Francesc Serratosa
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2019-04-10       Impact factor: 4.956

8.  Learning the Edit Costs of Graph Edit Distance Applied to Ligand-Based Virtual Screening.

Authors:  Carlos Garcia-Hernandez; Alberto Fernández; Francesc Serratosa
Journal:  Curr Top Med Chem       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 9.  Recent applications of deep learning and machine intelligence on in silico drug discovery: methods, tools and databases.

Authors:  Ahmet Sureyya Rifaioglu; Heval Atas; Maria Jesus Martin; Rengul Cetin-Atalay; Volkan Atalay; Tunca Doğan
Journal:  Brief Bioinform       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 11.622

10.  SimCAL: a flexible tool to compute biochemical reaction similarity.

Authors:  Tadi Venkata Sivakumar; Anirban Bhaduri; Rajasekhara Reddy Duvvuru Muni; Jin Hwan Park; Tae Yong Kim
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.