Literature DB >> 34799816

Fine tuning for success in structure-based virtual screening.

Emilie Pihan1, Martin Kotev2, Obdulia Rabal2, Claudia Beato3, Constantino Diaz Gonzalez2.   

Abstract

Structure-based virtual screening plays a significant role in drug-discovery. The method virtually docks millions of compounds from corporate or public libraries into a binding site of a disease-related protein structure, allowing for the selection of a small list of potential ligands for experimental testing. Many algorithms are available for docking and assessing the affinity of compounds for a targeted protein site. The performance of affinity estimation calculations is highly dependent on the size and nature of the site, therefore a rationale for selecting the best protocol is required. To address this issue, we have developed an automated calibration process, implemented in a Knime workflow. It consists of four steps: preparation of a protein test set with structures and models of the target, preparation of a compound test set with target-related ligands and decoys, automatic test of 24 scoring/rescoring protocols for each target structure and model, and graphical display of results. The automation of the process combined with execution on high performance computing resources greatly reduces the duration of the calibration phase, and the test of many combinations of algorithms on various target conformations results in a rational and optimal choice of the best protocol. Here, we present this tool and exemplify its application in setting-up an optimal protocol for SBVS against Retinoid X Receptor alpha.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Calibration; Decoys; Docking; Scoring; Structure-based virtual screening

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34799816     DOI: 10.1007/s10822-021-00431-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des        ISSN: 0920-654X            Impact factor:   3.686


  41 in total

Review 1.  Recognizing pitfalls in virtual screening: a critical review.

Authors:  Thomas Scior; Andreas Bender; Gary Tresadern; José L Medina-Franco; Karina Martínez-Mayorga; Thierry Langer; Karina Cuanalo-Contreras; Dimitris K Agrafiotis
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2012-04-06       Impact factor: 4.956

2.  Virtual compound screening in drug discovery.

Authors:  Dagmar Stumpfe; Peter Ripphausen; Jürgen Bajorath
Journal:  Future Med Chem       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.808

Review 3.  Open challenges in structure-based virtual screening: Receptor modeling, target flexibility consideration and active site water molecules description.

Authors:  Francesca Spyrakis; Claudio N Cavasotto
Journal:  Arch Biochem Biophys       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 4.013

4.  The compromise of virtual screening and its impact on drug discovery.

Authors:  Olivia Slater; Maria Kontoyianni
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Discov       Date:  2019-04-26       Impact factor: 6.098

5.  Novel inhibitors of As(III) S-adenosylmethionine methyltransferase (AS3MT) identified by virtual screening.

Authors:  Roland W Bürli; Huijun Wei; Glen Ernst; Abigail Mariga; Ian M Hardern; Kara Herlihy; Alan J Cross; Steven S Wesolowski; Hongming Chen; Ronald D G McKay; Daniel R Weinberger; Nicholas J Brandon; James C Barrow
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem Lett       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 2.823

6.  Discovery of novel 7-azaindoles as PDK1 inhibitors.

Authors:  Margarita Wucherer-Plietker; Eugen Merkul; Thomas J J Müller; Christina Esdar; Thorsten Knöchel; Timo Heinrich; Hans-Peter Buchstaller; Hartmut Greiner; Dieter Dorsch; Dirk Finsinger; Michel Calderini; David Bruge; Ulrich Grädler
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem Lett       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 2.823

7.  Modeling and Deorphanization of Orphan GPCRs.

Authors:  Constantino Diaz; Patricia Angelloz-Nicoud; Emilie Pihan
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2018

8.  Characterization and Fine Mapping of a Blast Resistant Gene Pi-jnw1 from the japonica Rice Landrace Jiangnanwan.

Authors:  Ruisen Wang; Nengyan Fang; Changhong Guan; Wanwan He; Yongmei Bao; Hongsheng Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-12-30       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  The ChEMBL database in 2017.

Authors:  Anna Gaulton; Anne Hersey; Michał Nowotka; A Patrícia Bento; Jon Chambers; David Mendez; Prudence Mutowo; Francis Atkinson; Louisa J Bellis; Elena Cibrián-Uhalte; Mark Davies; Nathan Dedman; Anneli Karlsson; María Paula Magariños; John P Overington; George Papadatos; Ines Smit; Andrew R Leach
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 16.971

10.  KRAS Binders Hidden in Nature.

Authors:  Andreas Bergner; Xiaoling Cockcroft; Gerhard Fischer; Andreas Gollner; Wolfgang Hela; Roland Kousek; Andreas Mantoulidis; Laetitia J Martin; Moriz Mayer; Barbara Müllauer; Gabriella Siszler; Bernhard Wolkerstorfer; Dirk Kessler; Darryl B McConnell
Journal:  Chemistry       Date:  2019-07-25       Impact factor: 5.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.