Structure-Based Virtual Screening for Drug Discovery: a Problem-Centric Review

Structure-based virtual screening (SBVS) has been widely applied in early-stage drug discovery. From a problem-centric perspective, we reviewed the recent advances and applications in SBVS with a special focus on docking-based virtual screening. We emphasized the researchers’ practical efforts in real projects by understanding the ligand-target binding interactions as a premise. We also highlighted the recent progress in developing target-biased scoring functions by optimizing current generic scoring functions toward certain target classes, as well as in developing novel ones by means of machine learning techniques.

[1]  Jacob D. Durrant,et al.  NNScore: A Neural-Network-Based Scoring Function for the Characterization of Protein−Ligand Complexes , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[2]  J. An,et al.  Structure-based virtual screening of chemical libraries for drug discovery. , 2006, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[3]  David S. Wishart,et al.  Development of a Novel Virtual Screening Cascade Protocol to Identify Potential Trypanothione Reductase Inhibitors , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  Cornel Catana,et al.  Novel, Customizable Scoring Functions, Parameterized Using N-PLS, for Structure-Based Drug Discovery , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[5]  Rita Santos,et al.  Role of Water in Molecular Docking Simulations of Cytochrome P450 2D6 , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[6]  Gareth Jones,et al.  G-Protein Coupled Receptors Virtual Screening Using Genetic Algorithm Focused Chemical Space , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[7]  M. Jacobson,et al.  Automated site preparation in physics‐based rescoring of receptor ligand complexes , 2009, Proteins.

[8]  Dmitri Kireev,et al.  Identification of non-peptide malignant brain tumor (MBT) repeat antagonists by virtual screening of commercially available compounds. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Customizing scoring functions for docking , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[10]  Ricardo L. Mancera,et al.  Ligand-Protein Cross-Docking with Water Molecules , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[11]  A. Hopkins,et al.  The druggable genome , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[12]  Gilles Marcou,et al.  Optimizing Fragment and Scaffold Docking by Use of Molecular Interaction Fingerprints , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[13]  D. C. Sullivan,et al.  AutoShim: Empirically Corrected Scoring Functions for Quantitative Docking with a Crystal Structure and IC50 Training Data. , 2008 .

[14]  Dirk Neumann,et al.  BALLDock/SLICK: A New Method for Protein-Carbohydrate Docking , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[15]  Todd J. A. Ewing,et al.  DOCK 4.0: Search strategies for automated molecular docking of flexible molecule databases , 2001, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[16]  Gerard Pujadas,et al.  Protein-ligand Docking: A Review of Recent Advances and Future Perspectives , 2008 .

[17]  Olivier Sperandio,et al.  How to choose relevant multiple receptor conformations for virtual screening: a test case of Cdk2 and normal mode analysis , 2010, European Biophysics Journal.

[18]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  Target flexibility: an emerging consideration in drug discovery and design. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  Reiji Teramoto,et al.  Supervised Scoring Models with Docked Ligand Conformations for Structure-Based Virtual Screening , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[20]  Christopher R. Corbeil,et al.  Towards the development of universal, fast and highly accurate docking/scoring methods: a long way to go , 2008, British journal of pharmacology.

[21]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Recipes for the Selection of Experimental Protein Conformations for Virtual Screening , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[22]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Virtual screening: an endless staircase? , 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[23]  Markus H J Seifert,et al.  Targeted scoring functions for virtual screening. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[24]  G. Klebe,et al.  Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[25]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  DrugScoreRNAKnowledge-Based Scoring Function To Predict RNA-Ligand Interactions , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[26]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Inclusion of Solvation and Entropy in the Knowledge-Based Scoring Function for Protein-Ligand Interactions , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[27]  T. Tuccinardi.  Docking-based virtual screening: recent developments. , 2009, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[28]  M. Mezei,et al.  Molecular docking: a powerful approach for structure-based drug discovery. , 2011, Current computer-aided drug design.

[29]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[30]  Gary B. Fogel,et al.  Computational Intelligence Methods for Docking Scores , 2009 .

[31]  Maxwell D Cummings,et al.  Processing of small molecule databases for automated docking. , 2007, Medicinal chemistry (Shariqah (United Arab Emirates)).

[32]  P. Trojer,et al.  Virtual Screening and Biological Characterization of Novel Histone Arginine Methyltransferase PRMT1 Inhibitors , 2009, ChemMedChem.

[33]  D. J. Price,et al.  Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[34]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. , 2001, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[35]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Consistent Improvement of Cross-Docking Results Using Binding Site Ensembles Generated with Elastic Network Normal Modes , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[36]  Guillaume Bouvier,et al.  Automatic clustering of docking poses in virtual screening process using self-organizing map , 2010, Bioinform..

[37]  Oleg V Stroganov,et al.  Improving performance of docking-based virtual screening by structural filtration , 2010, Journal of molecular modeling.

[38]  D. E. Clark.  What has virtual screening ever done for drug discovery? , 2008, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[39]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Quo vadis, virtual screening? A comprehensive survey of prospective applications. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[40]  Luhua Lai,et al.  Further development and validation of empirical scoring functions for structure-based binding affinity prediction , 2002, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[41]  Bohdan Waszkowycz,et al.  Towards improving compound selection in structure-based virtual screening. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[42]  Christoph A Sotriffer,et al.  Accounting for induced-fit effects in docking: what is possible and what is not? , 2011, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[43]  C. Venkatachalam,et al.  LigandFit: a novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites. , 2003, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[44]  Claudio N. Cavasotto and Narender Singh.  Docking and High Throughput Docking: Successes and the Challenge of Protein Flexibility , 2008 .

[45]  Hans-Joachim Böhm,et al.  Prediction of binding constants of protein ligands: A fast method for the prioritization of hits obtained from de novo design or 3D database search programs , 1998, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[46]  Walter Filgueira de Azevedo,et al.  Molecular docking algorithms. , 2008, Current drug targets.

[47]  Elizabeth Yuriev,et al.  Challenges and advances in computational docking: 2009 in review , 2011, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[48]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Scoring functions and their evaluation methods for protein-ligand docking: recent advances and future directions. , 2010, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[49]  Kyungik Lee,et al.  Pharmacophore modeling and virtual screening studies for new VEGFR-2 kinase inhibitors. , 2010, European journal of medicinal chemistry.

[50]  Ata Amini,et al.  A general approach for developing system‐specific functions to score protein–ligand docked complexes using support vector inductive logic programming , 2007, Proteins.

[51]  Thomas E. Exner,et al.  pKa based protonation states and microspecies for protein–ligand docking , 2010, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[52]  Zhihai Liu,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions on a Diverse Test Set , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[53]  I. Kuntz,et al.  DOCK 6: combining techniques to model RNA-small molecule complexes. , 2009, RNA.

[54]  Luhua Lai,et al.  Binding Energy Landscape Analysis Helps to Discriminate True Hits from High-Scoring Decoys in Virtual Screening , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[55]  Wei Deng,et al.  Predicting Protein-Ligand Binding Affinities Using Novel Geometrical Descriptors and Machine-Learning Methods , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[56]  Colin McMartin,et al.  QXP: Powerful, rapid computer algorithms for structure-based drug design , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[57]  Philip E. Bourne,et al.  A Machine Learning-Based Method To Improve Docking Scoring Functions and Its Application to Drug Repurposing , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[58]  Marcel L Verdonk,et al.  General and targeted statistical potentials for protein–ligand interactions , 2005, Proteins.

[59]  Liwei Li,et al.  Target-Specific Support Vector Machine Scoring in Structure-Based Virtual Screening: Computational Validation, In Vitro Testing in Kinases, and Effects on Lung Cancer Cell Proliferation , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[60]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function , 1998, J. Comput. Chem..

[61]  Andreas Steffen,et al.  AIScore Chemically Diverse Empirical Scoring Function Employing Quantum Chemical Binding Energies of Hydrogen-Bonded Complexes , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[62]  F. Jørgensen,et al.  A new concept for multidimensional selection of ligand conformations (MultiSelect) and multidimensional scoring (MultiScore) of protein-ligand binding affinities. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[63]  Yong Eun Kim,et al.  A Structure‐Based Virtual Screening Approach toward the Discovery of Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors: Identification of Promising Zinc‐Chelating Groups , 2010, ChemMedChem.

[64]  Zsolt Zsoldos,et al.  Software tools for structure based rational drug design , 2003 .

[65]  Gennady M Verkhivker,et al.  Molecular recognition of the inhibitor AG-1343 by HIV-1 protease: conformationally flexible docking by evolutionary programming. , 1995, Chemistry & biology.

[66]  Kazuhiro Ishida,et al.  Identification of death-associated protein kinases inhibitors using structure-based virtual screening. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[67]  John B. O. Mitchell,et al.  A machine learning approach to predicting protein-ligand binding affinity with applications to molecular docking , 2010, Bioinform..

[68]  Duncan J. Smith,et al.  A critical assessment of the utility of protein-free splicing systems. , 2008, RNA.

[69]  Markus H. J. Seifert,et al.  Essential factors for successful virtual screening. , 2008, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[70]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  An Extensive Test of 14 Scoring Functions Using the PDBbind Refined Set of 800 Protein-Ligand Complexes , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[71]  R. Gozalbes,et al.  Development and experimental validation of a docking strategy for the generation of kinase-targeted libraries. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[72]  Jacob D. Durrant,et al.  Computer-aided drug-discovery techniques that account for receptor flexibility. , 2010, Current opinion in pharmacology.

[73]  M. Murcko,et al.  Consensus scoring: A method for obtaining improved hit rates from docking databases of three-dimensional structures into proteins. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[74]  B. Berne,et al.  Role of the active-site solvent in the thermodynamics of factor Xa ligand binding. , 2008, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[75]  Giulio Rastelli,et al.  Structure-based design of potent aromatase inhibitors by high-throughput docking. , 2011, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[76]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  How Does Consensus Scoring Work for Virtual Library Screening? An Idealized Computer Experiment , 2001, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[77]  Christian N. S. Pedersen,et al.  Molecular Docking with Ligand Attached Water Molecules , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[78]  G. V. Paolini,et al.  Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[79]  William L Jorgensen,et al.  Discovery of novel fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 kinase inhibitors by structure-based virtual screening. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[80]  Zhihai Liu,et al.  A knowledge-guided strategy for improving the accuracy of scoring functions in binding affinity prediction , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[81]  Renxiao Wang,et al.  Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[82]  P Willett,et al.  Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[83]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  ICM—A new method for protein modeling and design: Applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation , 1994, J. Comput. Chem..

[84]  Garland R. Marshall,et al.  PHOENIX: A Scoring Function for Affinity Prediction Derived Using High-Resolution Crystal Structures and Calorimetry Measurements , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[85]  Hualiang Jiang,et al.  Knowledge-Based Scoring Functions in Drug Design. 1. Developing a Target-Specific Method for Kinase-Ligand Interactions , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[86]  Ajay N. Jain.  Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[87]  Aurélien Grosdidier,et al.  Docking to heme proteins , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[88]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Four-dimensional docking: a fast and accurate account of discrete receptor flexibility in ligand docking. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[89]  Lingle Wang,et al.  Ligand binding to protein-binding pockets with wet and dry regions , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[90]  Ranbir Singh,et al.  J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem) , 1996 .

[91]  Hege S. Beard,et al.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[92]  Martin Smiesko,et al.  AcquaAlta: A Directional Approach to the Solvation of Ligand-Protein Complexes , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[93]  Maria A Miteva,et al.  Structure-based virtual ligand screening: recent success stories. , 2009, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[94]  M. Lill.  Efficient incorporation of protein flexibility and dynamics into molecular docking simulations. , 2011, Biochemistry.

[95]  C. E. Peishoff,et al.  A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[96]  I. Muegge.  PMF scoring revisited. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[97]  Jung-Hsin Lin.  Accommodating protein flexibility for structure-based drug design. , 2011, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[98]  Markus H. J. Seifert.  Optimizing the Signal-to-Noise Ratio of Scoring Functions for Protein-Ligand Docking , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[99]  Matthew P. Repasky,et al.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[100]  Samo Turk,et al.  Novel Inhibitors of Trihydroxynaphthalene Reductase with Antifungal Activity Identified by Ligand-Based and Structure-Based Virtual Screening , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..