Literature DB >> 33710894

Systematic Comparison and Comprehensive Evaluation of 80 Amino Acid Descriptors in Peptide QSAR Modeling.

Peng Zhou1,2, Qian Liu1,2, Ting Wu2, Qingqing Miao1,2, Shuyong Shang3, Heyi Wang1,2, Zheng Chen1,2, Shaozhou Wang2, Heyan Wang2.   

Abstract

The peptide quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR), also known as the quantitative sequence-activity model (QSAM), has attracted much attention in the bio- and chemoinformatics communities and is a well developed computational peptidology strategy to statistically correlate the sequence/structure and activity/property relationships of functional peptides. Amino acid descriptors (AADs) are one of the most widely used methods to characterize peptide structures by decomposing the peptide into its residue building blocks and sequentially parametrizing each building block with a vector of amino acid principal properties. Considering that various AADs have been proposed over the past decades and new AADs are still emerging today, we herein query the following: is it necessary to develop so many AADs and do we need to continuously develop more new AADs? In this study, we exhaustively collect 80 published AADs and comprehensively evaluate their modeling performance (including fitting ability, internal stability, and predictive power) on 8 QSAR-oriented peptide sample sets (QPSs) by employing 2 sophisticated machine learning methods (MLMs), totally building and systematically comparing 1280 (80 AADs × 8 QPSs × 2 MLMs) peptide QSAR models. The following is revealed: (i) None of the AADs can work best on all or most peptide sets; an AAD usually performs well for some peptides but badly for others. (ii) Modeling performance is primarily determined by the peptide samples and then the MLMs used, while AADs have only a moderate influence on the performance. (iii) There is no essential difference between the modeling performances of different AAD types (physiochemical, topological, 3D-structural, etc.). (iv) Two random descriptors, which are separately generated randomly in standard normal distribution N(0, 1) and uniform distribution U(-1, +1), do not perform significantly worse than these carefully developed AADs. (v) A secondary descriptor, which carries major information involved in the 80 (primary) AADs, does not perform significantly better than these AADs. Overall, we conclude that since there are various AADs available to date and they already cover numerous amino acid properties, further development of new AADs is not an essential choice to improve peptide QSAR modeling; the traditional AAD methodology is believed to have almost reached the theoretical limit nowadays. In addition, the AADs are more likely to be a vector symbol but not informative data; they are utilized to mark and distinguish the 20 amino acids but do not really bring much original property information to these amino acids.

Year:  2021        PMID: 33710894     DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01370

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


  9 in total

1.  Comprehensive binary interaction mapping of τ phosphotyrosine sites with SH2 domains in the human genome: Implications for the rational design of self-inhibitory phosphopeptides to target τ hyperphosphorylation signaling in Alzheimer's Disease.

Authors:  Zhonglei Bao; Jianghua Liu; Jin Fu
Journal:  Amino Acids       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 3.520

2.  Systematic analysis and molecular profiling of EGFR allosteric inhibitor cross-reactivity across the proto-oncogenic ErbB family kinases by integrating dynamics simulation, energetics calculation and biochemical assay.

Authors:  Yanli Ma; Bingli Qi; Meiying Ning; Lijuan Zhang; Zeyu An; Jing Zhao
Journal:  Eur Biophys J       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 1.733

3.  Molecular insight into the affinity, specificity and cross-reactivity of systematic hepatocellular carcinoma RALT interaction profile with human receptor tyrosine kinases.

Authors:  Guang Lu; Xiaoping Li; Jun Zhang; Qinghua Xu
Journal:  Amino Acids       Date:  2021-10-07       Impact factor: 3.520

4.  Structural Mapping of BMP Conformational Epitopes and Bioengineering Design of Osteogenic Peptides to Specifically Target the Epitope-Binding Sites.

Authors:  Hao Chen; Yaodong Zhou; Qirong Dong
Journal:  Cell Mol Bioeng       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 3.337

5.  Rational design of stapled helical peptides as antidiabetic PPARγ antagonists to target coactivator site by decreasing unfavorable entropy penalty instead of increasing favorable enthalpy contribution.

Authors:  Yang Zhang; Jie Wang; Wenchao Li; Ying Guo
Journal:  Eur Biophys J       Date:  2022-09-04       Impact factor: 2.095

6.  Application of Machine Learning in Developing Quantitative Structure-Property Relationship for Electronic Properties of Polyaromatic Compounds.

Authors:  Tuan H Nguyen; Lam H Nguyen; Thanh N Truong
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2022-06-17

7.  3pHLA-score improves structure-based peptide-HLA binding affinity prediction.

Authors:  Anja Conev; Didier Devaurs; Mauricio Menegatti Rigo; Dinler Amaral Antunes; Lydia E Kavraki
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Systematic Modeling, Prediction, and Comparison of Domain-Peptide Affinities: Does it Work Effectively With the Peptide QSAR Methodology?

Authors:  Qian Liu; Jing Lin; Li Wen; Shaozhou Wang; Peng Zhou; Li Mei; Shuyong Shang
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 4.599

9.  Comprehensive Evaluation and Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in QSAR Modeling of Antioxidant Tripeptides.

Authors:  Zhenjiao Du; Donghai Wang; Yonghui Li
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2022-07-15
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.