Literature DB >> 31220507

Predicting estrogen receptor binding of chemicals using a suite of in silico methods - Complementary approaches of (Q)SAR, molecular docking and molecular dynamics.

J V Cotterill1, L Palazzolo2, C Ridgway1, N Price1, E Rorije3, A Moretto4, A Peijnenburg5, I Eberini6.   

Abstract

With the aim of obtaining reliable estimates of Estrogen Receptor (ER) binding for diverse classes of compounds, a weight of evidence approach using estimates from a suite of in silico models was assessed. The predictivity of a simple Majority Consensus of (Q)SAR models was assessed using a test set of compounds with experimental Relative Binding Affinity (RBA) data. Molecular docking was also carried out and the binding energies of these compounds to the ERα receptor were determined. For a few selected compounds, including a known full agonist and antagonist, the intrinsic activity was determined using low-mode molecular dynamics methods. Individual (Q)SAR model predictivity varied, as expected, with some models showing high sensitivity, others higher specificity. However, the Majority Consensus (Q)SAR prediction showed a high accuracy and reasonably balanced sensitivity and specificity. Molecular docking provided quantitative information on strength of binding to the ERα receptor. For the 50 highest binding affinity compounds with positive RBA experimental values, just 5 of them were predicted to be non-binders by the Majority QSAR Consensus. Furthermore, agonist-specific assay experimental values for these 5 compounds were negative, which indicates that they may be ER antagonists. We also showed different scenarios of combining (Q)SAR results with Molecular docking classification of ER binding based on cut-off values of binding energies, providing a rational combined strategy to maximize terms of toxicological interest.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Estrogen receptor; In Silico; Low-mode molecular dynamics simulation; Molecular docking; QSAR

Year:  2019        PMID: 31220507     DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2019.114630

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


  4 in total

1.  In Silico Approaches In Carcinogenicity Hazard Assessment: Current Status and Future Needs.

Authors:  Raymond R Tice; Arianna Bassan; Alexander Amberg; Lennart T Anger; Marc A Beal; Phillip Bellion; Romualdo Benigni; Jeffrey Birmingham; Alessandro Brigo; Frank Bringezu; Lidia Ceriani; Ian Crooks; Kevin Cross; Rosalie Elespuru; David M Faulkner; Marie C Fortin; Paul Fowler; Markus Frericks; Helga H J Gerets; Gloria D Jahnke; David R Jones; Naomi L Kruhlak; Elena Lo Piparo; Juan Lopez-Belmonte; Amarjit Luniwal; Alice Luu; Federica Madia; Serena Manganelli; Balasubramanian Manickam; Jordi Mestres; Amy L Mihalchik-Burhans; Louise Neilson; Arun Pandiri; Manuela Pavan; Cynthia V Rider; John P Rooney; Alejandra Trejo-Martin; Karen H Watanabe-Sailor; Angela T White; David Woolley; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2021-09-23

2.  Predicting the binding of small molecules to nuclear receptors using machine learning.

Authors:  Azhagiya Singam Ettayapuram Ramaprasad; Martyn T Smith; David McCoy; Alan E Hubbard; Michele A La Merrill; Kathleen A Durkin
Journal:  Brief Bioinform       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 13.994

3.  DeepSnap-Deep Learning Approach Predicts Progesterone Receptor Antagonist Activity With High Performance.

Authors:  Yasunari Matsuzaka; Yoshihiro Uesawa
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-01-22

Review 4.  Application of Various Molecular Modelling Methods in the Study of Estrogens and Xenoestrogens.

Authors:  Anna Helena Mazurek; Łukasz Szeleszczuk; Thomas Simonson; Dariusz Maciej Pisklak
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 5.923

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.