Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Design of Small- and Medium-sized Focused Combinatorial Libraries

Design of focused combinatorial libraries

  • Chapter
Molecular Diversity in Drug Design

  • 173 Accesses

Abstract

The use of focused combinatorial libraries is becoming an important weapon in lead exploration and optimisation. The challenge for the modelling community is to harness the experience and knowledge we have in generating structure-activity relationships (SARs) for use in library design. This paper describes the different methods of calculating similarity and diversity from an SAR, several strategies for library design, the interplay between the descriptors in the design process, and some practical examples of focused library design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brown, R.D. Descriptors for diversity analysis. Perspect. Drug Disc. Des., 1997, 7/8, 31–39.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Dooley, C.T., Ny, P., Bidlack, J.M. and Houghten, R.A. Selective ligands for the sigma, delta, and kappa opioid receptors identified from a single mixture based tetrapeptide positional scanning combinatorial library. J. Biol. Chem., 1998, 273, 18848–18856.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Combs, A.P., Kapoor, T.M., Feng, S.B., Chen, J.K., Daudesnow, L.F. and Schreiber, S.L. Protein Structure-Based Combinatorial Chemistry: Discovery of Non-Peptide Binding Elements To Src SH3 Domain. J. Am.Chem. Soc., 1996, 118, 287–288.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Felder, E.R. and Poppinger, D. Combinatorial Compound Libraries for Enhanced Drug Discovery Approaches. Advances in Drug Research, 1997, 30, 111–199.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Taylor, R. Simulation Analysis of Experimental Design Strategies for Screening Random Compounds as Potential New Drugs and Agrochemicals. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1995, 35, 59–67.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kubinyi, H. Similarity and dissimilarity: a medicinal chemist’s view. Perspect. Drug Disc. Des. 1998, 9/10/11, 225–252.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Thompson, L.A. and Ellman, J.A., Synthesis and Applications of Small Molecule Libraries. Chem. Rev., 1996, 96, 555.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gordon, E.M., Gallop, M.A. and Patel, D.V., Strategy and Tactics in Combinatorial Organic Synthesis. Applications to Drug Discovery. Acc. Chem. Res., 1996, 29, 144.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Higgs, R.E., Bemis, K.G., Watson, I.A. and Wikel, J.H. Experimental Designs for Selecting Molecules from Large Chemical Databases. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1997, 37, 861–870.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lajiness, M. Evaluation of the Performance of Dissimilarity Selection Methodology. In QSAR: Rational Approaches to the Design of Bioactive Compounds, Eds Silipo, C. and Vittoria, A., Escom, 1991, pp. 201–204.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lewis, R.A., Mason, J.S. and McLay, I.M. Similarity Measures for Rational Set Selection and Analysis of Combinatorial Libraries: The Diverse Property-Derived (DPD) Approach. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1997, 37, 599–614.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rishton, G.M. Reactive Compounds and In Vitro False Positives in HTS. Drug Discovery Today, 1997, 2, 382–384.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lipinski, C.A., Lombardo, F., Dominy. B.W. and Feeney, P.J. Experimental and Computational Approaches to Estimate Solubility and Permeability in Drug Discovery and Development Settings. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 1997, 23, 3–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fecik, R.A., Frank, K.E., Gentry, E.J., Menon, S.R., Mitscher, L.A. and Telikepalli, H. The search for orally active medications through combinatorial chemistry. Med. Res. Rev., 1998, 18, 149–185.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. van de Waterbeemd, H., Camenisch, G., Folkers, G. and Raevsky, O.A. Estimation of Caco-2 Cell Permeability using Calculated Molecular Descriptors. QSAR, 1996, 15, 480–490.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Palm, K., Luthmann, K., Ungell, A.-L., Strandlund, G. and Artursson, P. Correlation of Drug Absorption with Molecular Surface Properties. J Pharm. Sci., 1996, 85, 32–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Palm K., Artursson. P. and Luthmann, K. Experimental and Theoretical Predictions of Intestinal Drug Absorption. In Computer-Assisted Lead Finding and Optimization: Current Tools for Medicinal Chemistry, Eds van de Waterbeemd, H., Testa, B. and Folkers, G., Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 1997, pp. 277–289.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Palm, K., Stenberg, P., Luthmann, K. and Artursson, P. Polar Molecular Surface Properties Predict the Intestinal Absorption of Drugs in Humans. Pharm. Res., 1997, 14, 568–571.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rodrigues, A.D. Preclinical Drug Metabolism in the Age of High-Throughput Screening: An Industrial Perspective. Pharm. Res., 1997, 14, 1504–1510.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Molecular Design Ltd, San Leandro, CA94577, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Daylight Chemical Information Systems, Mission Viejo, CA92691, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Zheng, Q. and Kyle, D.J. Computational Screening of Combinatorial Libraries. Bio Org. Med.Chem., 1996, 4, 631–638.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Walters, W.P., Stahl, M.T. & Murcko, M.A. Virtual Screening — an overview. Drug Discovery Today, 1998, 3, 160–178.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Zheng, Q. and Kyle, D.J. Computational Screening of Combinatorial Libraries via Multicopy Sampling. Drug Discovery Today, 1997, 2, 229–234.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sello, G. Similarity measures: Is it possible to compare dissimilar structures?. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1998, 38, 691–701.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Downs, G.M. and Willett, P. Similarity Searching in Databases of Chemical Structures. Rev. Comp. Chem., 1996, 7, 1–66.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Barnard, J.M. and Downs, G.M. Chemical Fragment Generation and Clustering Software. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1997, 37, 141–142.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Shemetulskis. N.E., Weininger, D., Blankley, C.J., Yang, J.J. and Humblet, C. Stigmata: An Algorithm to Determine Structural Commonalities in Diverse Datasets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1996, 36, 862–871.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Bradshaw. J. Introduction to Tversky similarity measure. Available at URL: http://www.daylight.com/meetings/mug97/Bradshaw/MUG97/tv_tversky.html

    Google Scholar 

  30. Turner, D.B., Tyrrell, S.M. and Willett, P. Rapid Quantification of Molecular Diversity for Selective Database Acquisition. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1997, 37, 18–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Downs, G.M. and Barnard, J.M. Techniques for Generating Descriptive Fingerprints in Combinatorial Libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1997, 37, 59–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Kier, L.H. and Hall, L.B. The Molecular Connectivity Chi Indexes and Kappa Shape Indexes in Structure-Property Modeling. Rev. Comp. Chem., 1991, 2, 367–422.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pearlman, R.S., Stewart, E.L., Smith, K.M. and Balducci, R. Novel Software Tools for Combinatorial Chemistry and Chemical Diversity. Paper given at the 1997 Charleston Conference Advancing New Lead Discovery, Isle of Palms. SC U.S.A. (March 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Downs, G.M.. Willett, P. and Fisanick. W. Similarity Searching and Clustering of Chemical Structure Databases Using Molecular Property Data. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1994, 34, 1094–1102.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Cramer, R.D., Clark, R.D.. Patterson, D.E. and Ferguson, A.M. Bioisosterism as a Molecular Diversity Descriptor: Steric Fields of Single Topomeric Conformers. J. Med. Chem., 1996, 39, 3060–3069.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Chapman, D. The Measurement of Molecular Diversity: A Three-Dimensional Approach. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des., 1996, 10, 501–512.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Rohm, H.J. The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des., 1994, 8, 243–256.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Good, A.C. & Richards, W.G. Rapid evaluation of shape similarity using Gaussian functions. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1993, 33, 112–116.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Cramer, R.D., DePriest, S.A., Patterson, D.E. and Hecht, P. The Developing Practice of Comparative Molecular Field Analysis. In 3D QSARin DrugDesign. Ed. Kubinyi, H., ESCOM, Leiden, 1993, pp. 443–485.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kim, K.H. Comparative molecular field Analysis (CoMFA). In Molecular Similarity in Drug Design. Ed.: Dean, P.M., Chapman & Hall: London 1995, pp 291–331.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Wermuth, C. and Langer, T. (1993) Pharmacophore Identification. In: 3D QSARin Drug Design, Ed. Kubinyi, H., ESCOM, Leiden, 1993, pp. 117–136.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mason J. S. Absolute versus Relative Similarity and Diversity. In: Molecular Diversity in Drug Design, Ed. Dean P.M. and Lewis R.A., Kluwer, 1999, Ch. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  43. VanDrie, J.H. Strategies for the determination of pharmacophoric 3D database queries, J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des., 1997, 11, 39–52.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Pickett, S.D., Luttmann, C., Guerin, V., Laoui, A. and James, E. DIVSEL and COMPLIB-Strategies for the Design and Comparison of Combinatorial Libraries using Pharmacophoric Descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1998, 38, 144–150.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Myers, P.L., Green. J.W., Saunders, J. and Teig, S.L. Rapid, Reliable Drug Discovery. Today’s Chemist at Work 1997, July/August, 46–53.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Good, A.C. and Mason, J.S. Three-Dimensional Structure Database Searches. Rev. Comp. Rev. Comp. Chem., 1996, 7, 67–118

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Roe D.C. Molecular diversity in site-focused libraries. In: Molecular Diversity in Drug Design, Ed. Dean P.M. and Lewis R.A., Kluwer, 1999. Ch. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Eldrige, M. D., Murray, C.W., Auton, T.R., Paolini, G.V. and Mee, R.P. Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des., 1997, 11, 425–445.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Blaney, J.M. and Martin, E.J. Computational Approaches for Combinatorial Library Design and Molecular Diversity Analysis. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol., 1997, 1, 54–59.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Martin, E.J., Blaney, J.M., Siani, M.A., Spellmeyer, D.C., Wong, A.K. and Moo, W.H. Measuring Diversity: Experimental Design of Combinatorial Libraries for Drug Discovery. J. Med. Chem., 1995, 38, 1431–1436.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Gillet, V.J., Willett, P. and Bradshaw, J. The Effectiveness of Reactant Pools for Generating Structurally-Diverse Combinatorial Libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1997, 37, 731–740.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Lewis, R.A., Good, A.C. and Pickett, S.D. Quantification of Molecular Similarity and Its Application to Combinatorial Chemistry. In Computer-Assisted Lead Finding and Optimization: Current Toolsfor Medicinal Chemistry Eds. van de Waterbeemd, H., Testa, B. and Folkers, G., Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 1997, pp. 135–156.

    Google Scholar 

  53. van Drie, J.H. and Lajiness, M.S. Approaches to Virtual Library Design. Drug Discovery Today, 1998, 3, 274–283.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Ross, T.M. and Reitz, A.B. Measuring Diversity: Experimental Design of Combinatorial Libraries for Drug Discovery. Chemtracts: Organic Chemistry, 1996, 9, 110–114.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Agrafiotis. D.K. Stochastic Algorithms for Maximizing Molecular Diversity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1997, 37, 841–851.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Holliday, J.D. and Willett, P. Definitions of Dissimilarity for Dissimilarity-Based Compound Selection. J. Biomolecular Screening, 1996, 1, 145–151.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Snarey, M., Terrett, N.K., Willett, P. and Wilton, D.J. Comparison of algorithms for dissimilarity-based compound selection. J. Mol. Graph. Modelling. In the press.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Clark, R.D. OptiSim: An Extended Dissimilarity Selection Method for Finding Diverse Representative Subsets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1997, 37, 1181–1188.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Hassan, M., Bielawski, J.P., Hempel, J.C. and Waldman, M. Optimisation and Visualisation of Molecular Diversity of Combinatorial Libraries. Molecular Diversity, 1996, 2, 64–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Weber, L., Wallbaum, S., Broger, C. and Gubernator, K. Optimisation of the Biological Activity of Combinatorial Compound Libraries by a Genetic Algorithm. Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. Eng., 1995, 34, 2280–2282.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Sheridan, R.P. and Kearsley, S.K. Using a Genetic Algorithm to Suggest Combinatorial Libraries. J. Chem. Inf Comput. Sci., 1995, 35, 310–320.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Weber, L. And Almstetter, M. Diversity in Very Large Libraries. In: Molecular Diversity in Drug Design, Ed. Dean P.M. and Lewis R.A., Kluwer, 1999, Ch. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Good, A.C. and Lewis, R.A. New Methodology for Profiling Combinatorial Libraries and Screening Sets: Cleaning Up the Design Process with HARPick. J. Med. Chem., 1997, 40, 3926–3936.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Sadowski. J., Wagener, M. And Gasteiger, J., Assessing similarity and diversity of combinatorial libraries by spatial autocorrelation functions and neural networks, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Eng., 1995, 34, 2674–2677.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Standard Drug File, (now known as the World Drug Index), Derwent Publications Ltd.14 Great Queen Street, London, WC2B, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Warr, W.A. Commercial Software Systems for Diversity Analysis. Perspect. Drug Disc. Des., 1997, 7/8, 115–130.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Molecular Simulations Inc., San Diego CA 92121, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Tripos, St. Louis, Missouri 63144. USA.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Patterson, D.E., Cramer, R.D., Ferguson, A.M., Clark, R.D. and Weinberger, L.E. Neighbourhood Behaviour: A Useful Concept for Validation of Molecular Diversity Descriptors. J. Med.Chem., 1996, 39, 3049–3059.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Davies, E.K. Using Pharmacophore Diversity to Select Molecules to Test from Commercial Catalogues. In Molecular Diversity and Combinatorial Chemistry: Libraries and Drug Discovery. Eds: Chaiken, I.M. and Janda, K.D. ACS: Washington DC, 1996, pp 309–316.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Chemical Design Ltd, part of OMG, Oxford Science Park, Oxford OX4 4GA, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Cho, S.J., Zheng, W. and Tropsha, A. Rational Combinatorial Library Design. 2. Rational Design of Targeted Combinatorial Peptide libraries using chemical similarity probe and inverse QSAR approaches, J. Chem. lnf. Comput. Sci., 1998, 38, 259–268.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Lui, D., Jiang, H., Chen, K. and Ji, R. A new approach to design virtual combinatorial library with genetic algorithm based on 3D property. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1998, 38, 233–242.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Brown, P.J., Smith-Oliver, T.A., Charifson, P.S., Tomkinson, N.C.O., Fivush, A.M., Sternbach, D.D., Wade, L.E., Orband-Miller, L., Parks, D.J., Blanchard, S.G., Kliewer, S.A., Lehmann, J.H. and Willson, T.M. Identification of Peroxisome Proliferator-activated Receptor Ligands from a Biased Chemical Library. Chemistry and Biology, 1997, 4, 909–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lilly Research Centre, Eli Lilly & Co. Ltd, Windlesham, Surrey, GU20 6PH, UK

    Richard A. Lewis

Authors
  1. Richard A. Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Philip M. Dean Richard A. Lewis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lewis, R.A. (2002). The Design of Small- and Medium-sized Focused Combinatorial Libraries. In: Dean, P.M., Lewis, R.A. (eds) Molecular Diversity in Drug Design. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-46873-5_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-46873-5_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-5980-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-306-46873-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation