Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 231–244 | Cite as

In vitro and in silico affinity fingerprints: Finding similarities beyond structural classes

  • Hans Briem
  • Uta F. Lessel
Article

Abstract

In this article, we review the use of in vitro and in silico affinity fingerprints as novel descriptors for similarity searches in molecular databases and QSAR analyses. An affinity fingerprint for a particular molecule is constructed as a vector of either its binding affinities, docking scores or superpositioning pseudoenergies against a reference panel of proteins or small molecules. In contrast to most other molecular descriptors, affinity fingerprints are not directly derived from molecular structures. As such, they offer the possibility to detect similarities amongst molecules independent of their structural scaffolds. In this report we introduce the Flexsim-S method, an extension of our previous work on virtual affinity fingerprints. Moreover, we demonstrate that virtual affinity fingerprint methods are comparable to some popular two-dimensional descriptors in terms ofcorrectly classifying compounds, but complementary with respect to the particular search results (hit lists).

affinity fingerprints database searching moleculardescriptors molecular similarity QSAR virtual screening 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Johnson, M.A. and Maggiora, G.M., Concepts and Applications of Molecular Similarity, Wiley, New York, NY, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brown, R.D. and Martin, Y.C., J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 36 (1999) 572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Patterson, D.E., Cramer, R.D., Ferguson, A.M., Clark, R.D. and Weinberger, L.E., J. Med. Chem., 39 (1996) 3049.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Matter, H., J. Med. Chem., 40 (1997) 1219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Briem, H. and Kuntz, I.D., J. Med. Chem., 39 (1996) 3401.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    DAYLIGHT, Version 4.62, DAYLIGHT Inc., Mission Viejo, CA.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISIS, Version 2.1.4, Molecular Design Ltd., San Leandro, CA.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weinstein, J.N., Kohn, K.W., Grever, M.R., Viswanadhan, V.N., Rubinstein, L.V., Monks, A.P., Scudiero, D.A., Welch, L., Koutsoukos, A.D., Chiausa, A.J. and Paull, K.D., Science, 258 (1992) 447.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weinstein, J.N., Myers, T.G., O'Connor, P.M., Friend, S.H., Fornace, A.J., Kohn, K.W., Fojo, T., Bates, S.E., Rubinstein, L.V., Anderson, N.L., Buolamwini, J.K., van Osdol, W.W., Monks, A.P., Scudiero, D.A., Sausville, E.A., Zaharevitz, D.W., Bunow, B., Viswanadhan, V.N., Johnson, G.S., Wittes, R.E. and Paull, K.D., Science, 275 (1997) 343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kauvar, L.M., Higgins, D.L., Villar, H.O., Sportsman, J.R., Engqvist-Goldstein, A., Bukar, R., Bauer, K.E., Dilley, H. and Rocke, D.M., Chem. Biol., 2 (1995) 107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dixon, S.L. and Villar, H.O., J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 38 (1998) 1192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    a. DOCK, Version 3.5, University of California, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  13. b.
    Kuntz, I.D., Blaney, J.M., Oatley, S.J., Langridge, R. and Ferrin, T.E., J. Mol. Biol., 161 (1982) 269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. c.
    Shoichet, B.K., Bodian, D.L. and Kuntz, I.D., J. Comput. Chem., 13 (1992) 380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. d.
    Meng, E.C., Shoichet, B.K. and Kuntz, I.D., J. Comput. Chem., 13 (1992) 505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 13.
    Bernstein, F.C., Koetzle, T.F., Williams, G.J.B., Meyer Jr., E.F., Brice, M.D., Rodgers, J.R., Kennard, O., Shimanouchi, T. and Tasumi, M., J. Mol. Biol., 112 (1977) 535.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 14.
    Lessel, U.F. and Briem, H., J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 40 (2000) 246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 15.
    Rarey, M., Kramer, B., Lengauer, T. and Klebe, G., J. Mol. Biol., 261 (1996) 470.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 16.
    Ghuloum, A.M., Sage, C.R. and Jain, A.N., J. Med. Chem., 42 (1999) 1739.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 17.
    Leo, A.J., Chem. Rev., 93 (1993) 1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 18.
    Lemmen, C., Lengauer, T. and Klebe, G., J. Med. Chem., 41 (1998) 4502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 19.
    SUGAL Genetic Algorithm package, Version 2.1, written by Dr Andrew Hunter at the University of Sunderland, U.K.Google Scholar
  23. 20.
    Sadowski, J., Schwab, C.H. and Gasteiger, J., CORINA 3D-Structure Generator Program description, 1997.Google Scholar
  24. 21.
    Gasteiger, J. and Marsili, M., Tetrahedron, 36 (1980) 3219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 22.
    Lemmen, C., Hiller, C. and Lengauer, T., J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design, 12 (1998) 491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 23.a.
    Rarey, M. and Dixon, J.S., J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design, 12 (1998) 471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. b.
    http://cartan.gmd.de/ftrees/ftrees_home.html.Google Scholar
  28. 24.
    SYBYL, Version 6.5.3, HQSAR Module, Tripos Inc., St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
  29. 25.
    DOCK, Version 4.0, University of California, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  30. 26.
    Ginn, C.M.R., Ranade, S.S., Willett, P. and Bradshaw, J., In: Arabnia, H.R. and Zhu, D. (Eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Multisource-Multisensor Information Fusion, Fusion'98, CSREA Press, 1998, pp. 307–313.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans Briem
    • 1
  • Uta F. Lessel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Lead DiscoveryBoehringer Ingelheim Pharma KGIngelheimGermany

Personalised recommendations