Design of a Three-Dimensional Multitarget Activity Landscape

The design of activity landscape representations is challenging when compounds are active against multiple targets. Going beyond three or four targets, the complexity of underlying activity spaces is difficult to capture in conventional activity landscape views. Previous attempts to generate multitarget activity landscapes have predominantly utilized extensions of molecular network representations or plots of activity versus chemical similarity for pairs of active compounds. Herein, we introduce a three-dimensional multitarget activity landscape design that is based upon principles of radial coordinate visualization. Circular representations of multitarget activity and chemical reference space are combined to generate a spherical view into which compound sets are projected for interactive analysis. Interpretation of landscape content is facilitated by following three canonical views of activity, chemical, and combined activity/chemical space, respectively. These views focus on different planes of the underlying coordinate system. From the activity and combined views, compounds with well-defined target selectivity and structure-activity profile relationships can be extracted. In the activity landscape, such compounds display characteristic spatial arrangements and target activity patterns.

[1]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Activity landscape representations for structure-activity relationship analysis. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[2]  S. B. Needleman,et al.  A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. , 1970, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  José L Medina-Franco,et al.  Bioactivity landscape modeling: chemoinformatic characterization of structure-activity relationships of compounds tested across multiple targets. , 2012, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[4]  Austin B. Yongye,et al.  Multitarget Structure-Activity Relationships Characterized by Activity-Difference Maps and Consensus Similarity Measure , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[5]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[7]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  From Structure–Activity to Structure–Selectivity Relationships: Quantitative Assessment, Selectivity Cliffs, and Key Compounds , 2009, ChemMedChem.

[8]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Navigating High-Dimensional Activity Landscapes: Design and Application of the Ligand-Target Differentiation Map , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[9]  David Weininger,et al.  SMILES, a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to methodology and encoding rules , 1988, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Anne Mai Wassermann,et al.  Design of Multitarget Activity Landscapes That Capture Hierarchical Activity Cliff Distributions , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[11]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Representation of Multi‐Target Activity Landscapes Through Target Pair‐Based Compound Encoding in Self‐Organizing Maps , 2011, Chemical biology & drug design.

[12]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  Chemography: the Art of Navigating in Chemical Space , 2000 .

[13]  Andreas Prlic,et al.  Sequence analysis , 2003 .

[14]  José L. Medina-Franco,et al.  Structure–activity relationships of benzimidazole derivatives as antiparasitic agents: Dual activity-difference (DAD) maps , 2011 .

[15]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Methods for SAR visualization , 2012 .

[16]  P. Hajduk,et al.  Navigating the kinome. , 2011, Nature chemical biology.