Computational characterization of SAR microenvironments in high-throughput screening data

Purpose: A computational approach is described to analyze structure–activity relationship (SAR) information contained in compound and screening data sets. The methodology is designed to explore SAR information in a systematic and compound-centric manner in order to aid in the selection of hits from high-throughput screening (HTS) data. Methods: Chemical neighborhood graphs integrate a graphical representation of the chemical environment of each active compound in a data set with the potency distribution within its neighborhood and information from a quantitative SAR analysis function. Environments are systematically generated and ranked by SAR information content. From these environments, key compounds and compound series can be selected. Results: The methodology is described in detail. In addition, the application to four screening data sets is reported, revealing different SAR characteristics. A number of different examples of compound environments are presented and discussed that have varying SAR information

[1]  Andreas Sewing,et al.  Evaluating Real-Life High-Throughput Screening Data , 2005, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[2]  Mathias Wawer,et al.  Systematic Extraction of Structure–Activity Relationship Information from Biological Screening Data , 2009, ChemMedChem.

[3]  Anne Mai Wassermann,et al.  SARANEA: A Freely Available Program To Mine Structure-Activity and Structure-Selectivity Relationship Information in Compound Data Sets , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  Harald Mauser,et al.  Database Clustering with a Combination of Fingerprint and Maximum Common Substructure Methods. , 2005 .

[5]  Yves-Jacques Schneider,et al.  CYP1A1 induction and CYP3A4 inhibition by the fungicide imazalil in the human intestinal Caco-2 cells-comparison with other conazole pesticides. , 2009, Toxicology letters.

[6]  Alain Calvet,et al.  Molecular Property eXplorer: A Novel Approach to Visualizing SAR Using Tree-Maps and Heatmaps , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[7]  Gerald M. Maggiora,et al.  On Outliers and Activity Cliffs-Why QSAR Often Disappoints , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  Stefan Wetzel,et al.  The Scaffold Tree - Visualization of the Scaffold Universe by Hierarchical Scaffold Classification , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[9]  Ahlberg.  Visual exploration of HTS databases: bridging the gap between chemistry and biology. , 1999, Drug discovery today.

[10]  Alexander Böcker,et al.  Toward an Improved Clustering of Large Data Sets Using Maximum Common Substructures and Topological Fingerprints , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[11]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Structure-activity relationship anatomy by network-like similarity graphs and local structure-activity relationship indices. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[12]  Glenn J. Myatt,et al.  LeadScope: Software for Exploring Large Sets of Screening Data , 2000, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[13]  P A Janssen,et al.  Saperconazole: A selective inhibitor of the cytochrome P‐450‐dependent ergosterol synthesis in Candida albicans, Aspergillus fumigatus and Trichophyton mentagrophytes , 1990, Mycoses.

[14]  Robert Nadon,et al.  Statistical practice in high-throughput screening data analysis , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[15]  A. Barasch,et al.  Miconazole revisited: new evidence of antifungal efficacy from laboratory and clinical trials. , 2008, Future microbiology.

[16]  John M. Barnard,et al.  Chemical Similarity Searching , 1998, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..