Critical Comparison of Virtual Screening Methods against the MUV Data Set

被引:37
作者
Tiikkainen, Pekka [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Markt, Patrick [4 ,5 ]
Wolber, Gerhard [4 ,5 ]
Kirchmair, Johannes [4 ,5 ]
Distinto, Simona [4 ,5 ]
Poso, Antti [6 ]
Kallioniemi, Olli [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Turku, FI-20521 Turku, Finland
[2] VTT Med Biotechnol, FI-20521 Turku, Finland
[3] FIMM Inst Mol Med, FI-00290 Helsinki, Finland
[4] Univ Innsbruck, Dept Pharmaceut Chem, Fac Chem & Pharm, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
[5] Univ Innsbruck, Ctr Mol Biosci CMBI, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
[6] Univ Kuopio, Dept Pharmaceut Chem, FI-70211 Kuopio, Finland
关键词
D O I
10.1021/ci900249b
中图分类号
R914 [药物化学];
学科分类号
100701 ;
摘要
In the current work, we measure the performance of seven ligand-based virtual screening tools - five similarity search methods and two pharmacophore elucidators - against the MUV data set. For the similarity search tools, single active molecules as well as active compound sets clustered in terms of their chemical diversity were used as templates., Their score was calculated against all inactive and active compounds in their target class. Subsequently, the scores were used to calculate different performance metrics in eluding enrichment factors and AUC values. We also studied the effect of data fusion on the results. To measure the performance of the pharmacophore tools, a set of active molecules was picked either random- or chemical diversity-based from each target class to build a pharmacophore model which was then used to screen the remaining compounds in the set. Our results indicate that template sets selected by their chemical diversity are the best choice for similarity search tools, whereas the optimal training sets for pharmacophore elucidators are based on random selection underscoring that pharmacophore modeling cannot be easily automated. We also suggest a number of improvements for future benchmark sets and discuss activity cliffs as a potential problem in ligand-based virtual screening.
引用
收藏
页码:2168 / 2178
页数:11
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
*ACC INC, 2007, PIP PIL STUD VERS 6
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2005, CAT
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2007, MOE
[4]   The properties of known drugs .1. Molecular frameworks [J].
Bemis, GW ;
Murcko, MA .
JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY, 1996, 39 (15) :2887-2893
[5]  
CLEMENT OO, 2000, PHARMACOPHORE PERCEP, P71
[6]   Understanding false positives in reporter gene assays: in silico chemogenomics approaches to prioritize cell-based HTS data [J].
Crisman, Thomas J. ;
Parker, Christian N. ;
Jenkins, Jeremy L. ;
Scheiber, Josef ;
Thoma, Mathis ;
Bin Kang, Zhao ;
Kim, Richard ;
Bender, Andreas ;
Nettles, James H. ;
Davies, John W. ;
Glick, Meir .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL INFORMATION AND MODELING, 2007, 47 (04) :1319-1327
[7]   Virtual screening of biogenic amine-binding G-protein coupled receptors: Comparative evaluation of protein- and ligand-based virtual screening protocols [J].
Evers, A ;
Hessler, G ;
Matter, H ;
Klabunde, T .
JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY, 2005, 48 (17) :5448-5465
[8]   Optimization of CAMD techniques 3. Virtual screening enrichment studies: a help or hindrance in tool selection? [J].
Good, Andrew C. ;
Oprea, Tudor I. .
JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN, 2008, 22 (3-4) :169-178
[9]   Assessing how well a modeling protocol captures a structure-activity landscape [J].
Guha, Rajarshi ;
Van Drie, John H. .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL INFORMATION AND MODELING, 2008, 48 (08) :1716-1728
[10]   Structure-activity landscape index: Identifying and quantifying activity cliffs [J].
Guha, Rajarshi ;
Van Drie, John H. .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL INFORMATION AND MODELING, 2008, 48 (03) :646-658