Benchmarking sets for molecular docking

被引:1044
作者
Huang, Niu [1 ]
Shoichet, Brian K. [1 ]
Irwin, John J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Pharmaceut Chem, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1021/jm0608356
中图分类号
R914 [药物化学];
学科分类号
100701 ;
摘要
Ligand enrichment among top-ranking hits is a key metric of molecular docking. To avoid bias, decoys should resemble ligands physically, so that enrichment is not simply a separation of gross features, yet be chemically distinct from them, so that they are unlikely to be binders. We have assembled a directory of useful decoys ( DUD), with 2950 ligands for 40 different targets. Every ligand has 36 decoy molecules that are physically similar but topologically distinct, leading to a database of 98 266 compounds. For most targets, enrichment was at least half a log better with uncorrected databases such as the MDDR than with DUD, evidence of bias in the former. These calculations also allowed 40 x 40 cross- docking, where the enrichments of each ligand set could be compared for all 40 targets, enabling a specificity metric for the docking screens. DUD is freely available online as a benchmarking set for docking at http://blaster.docking.org/dud/.
引用
收藏
页码:6789 / 6801
页数:13
相关论文
共 85 条
[1]   High-throughput docking as a source of novel drug leads [J].
Alvarez, JC .
CURRENT OPINION IN CHEMICAL BIOLOGY, 2004, 8 (04) :365-370
[2]  
[Anonymous], SYBYL
[3]   The Protein Data Bank [J].
Berman, HM ;
Westbrook, J ;
Feng, Z ;
Gilliland, G ;
Bhat, TN ;
Weissig, H ;
Shindyalov, IN ;
Bourne, PE .
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH, 2000, 28 (01) :235-242
[4]   Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. 1. Evaluation of different docking/scoring combinations [J].
Bissantz, C ;
Folkers, G ;
Rognan, D .
JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY, 2000, 43 (25) :4759-4767
[5]   Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship analyses using comparative molecular field analysis and comparative molecular similarity indices analysis to elucidate selectivity differences of inhibitors binding to trypsin, thrombin, and factor Xa [J].
Böhm, M ;
Stürzebecher, J ;
Klebe, G .
JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY, 1999, 42 (03) :458-477
[6]   Here Be dragons: Docking and screening in an uncharted region of chemical space [J].
Brenk, R ;
Irwin, JJ ;
Shoichet, BK .
JOURNAL OF BIOMOLECULAR SCREENING, 2005, 10 (07) :667-674
[7]   Molecular recognition and docking algorithms [J].
Brooijmans, N ;
Kuntz, ID .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF BIOPHYSICS AND BIOMOLECULAR STRUCTURE, 2003, 32 :335-373
[8]   Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases [J].
Cavasotto, CN ;
Abagyan, RA .
JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, 2004, 337 (01) :209-225
[9]   Consensus scoring: A method for obtaining improved hit rates from docking databases of three-dimensional structures into proteins [J].
Charifson, PS ;
Corkery, JJ ;
Murcko, MA ;
Walters, WP .
JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY, 1999, 42 (25) :5100-5109
[10]   FlexE: Efficient molecular docking considering protein structure variations [J].
Claussen, H ;
Buning, C ;
Rarey, M ;
Lengauer, T .
JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, 2001, 308 (02) :377-395