Flux (2): Comparison of Molecular Mutation and Crossover Operators for Ligand-Based de Novo Design

We implemented a fragment-based de novo design algorithm for a population-based optimization of molecular structures. The concept is grounded on an evolution strategy with mutation and crossover operators for structure breeding. Molecular building blocks were obtained from the pseudo-retrosynthesis of a collection of pharmacologically active compounds following the RECAP principle. The influence of mutation and crossover on the course of optimization was assessed in redesign studies using known drugs as template structures. A topological atom-pair descriptor grounded on potential pharmacophore points was used as a molecular descriptor, and the Manhattan distance between the template and candidate molecules served as a fitness function. Exclusive use of the crossover operator yielded few unique compounds and often resulted in premature convergence of the optimization process, whereas exclusive use of the mutation operator resulted in diverse high-quality structures. Combinations of crossover and mutation yielded the overall best results. The majority of the designed structures exhibit a chemically reasonable architecture; chiral centers are rare, and unfavorable connections of building blocks are infrequent. We conclude that this fragment-based design principle is suited as an idea generator for the automated design of novel leadlike molecules.

[1]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Optimization of a Pharmacophore‐based Correlation Vector Descriptor for Similarity Searching , 2004 .

[2]  T. Blundell,et al.  Structural biology and drug discovery. , 2005, Drug discovery today.

[3]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Optimized Particle Swarm Optimization (OPSO) and its application to artificial neural network training , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[4]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Evaluation of Distance Metrics for Ligand‐Based Similarity Searching , 2004, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[5]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Identification of novel cannabinoid receptor ligands via evolutionary de novo design and rapid parallel synthesis , 2004 .

[6]  James Kennedy,et al.  Particle swarm optimization , 2002, Proceedings of ICNN'95 - International Conference on Neural Networks.

[7]  Anthony Williams,et al.  Generation and Selection of Novel Estrogen Receptor Ligands Using the De Novo Structure-Based Design Tool, SkelGen , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  Matthias Rarey,et al.  FlexNovo: Structure‐Based Searching in Large Fragment Spaces , 2006, ChemMedChem.

[9]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Computer-based de novo design of drug-like molecules , 2005, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[10]  Haiyan Liu,et al.  Structure-based ligand design for flexible proteins: Application of new F-DycoBlock , 2001, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

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

[12]  Michael M. Hann,et al.  RECAP — Retrosynthetic Combinatorial Analysis Procedure: A Powerful New Technique for Identifying Privileged Molecular Fragments with Useful Applications in Combinatorial Chemistry. , 1998 .

[13]  H. Schwefel Deep insight from simple models of evolution. , 2002, Bio Systems.

[14]  Arthur Dalby,et al.  Description of several chemical structure file formats used by computer programs developed at Molecular Design Limited , 1992, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[15]  D J Diller,et al.  The different strategies for designing GPCR and kinase targeted libraries. , 2004, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

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

[17]  H J Böhm,et al.  Computational tools for structure-based ligand design. , 1996, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[18]  Jennifer R. Krumrine,et al.  Statistical tools for virtual screening. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  Schmid,et al.  "Scaffold-Hopping" by Topological Pharmacophore Search: A Contribution to Virtual Screening. , 1999, Angewandte Chemie.

[20]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  The Molecule Evoluator. An Interactive Evolutionary Algorithm for the Design of Drug-Like Molecules , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[21]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Collection of bioactive reference compounds for focused library design , 2003 .

[22]  A. Hopkins,et al.  Navigating chemical space for biology and medicine , 2004, Nature.

[23]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Flux (1): A Virtual Synthesis Scheme for Fragment-Based de Novo Design , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[24]  Egon L. Willighagen,et al.  The Chemistry Development Kit (CDK): An Open-Source Java Library for Chemo-and Bioinformatics , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[25]  Russell C. Eberhart,et al.  A new optimizer using particle swarm theory , 1995, MHS'95. Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science.

[26]  G. Schneider,et al.  Virtual Screening for Bioactive Molecules , 2000 .

[27]  Hans-Joachim Böhm,et al.  A guide to drug discovery: Hit and lead generation: beyond high-throughput screening , 2003, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[28]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Scaffold‐Hopping: How Far Can You Jump? , 2006 .