Methods for Computer‐Aided Chemical Biology. Part 3: Analysis of Structure–Selectivity Relationships through Single‐ or Dual‐Step Selectivity Searching and Bayesian Classification

The identification of small molecules that are selective for individual targets within target families is an important task in chemical biology. We aim at the development of computational approaches for the study of structure–selectivity relationships and prediction of target‐selective ligands. In previous studies, we have introduced the concept of selectivity searching. Here we study compound selectivity on the basis of 18 selectivity sets that are designed to contain target‐selective molecules and compounds that are comparably active against related targets. These sets consist of a total of 432 compounds and focus on eight targets belonging to four target families. This compound source has enabled us to evaluate different computational approaches to search for target‐selective compounds in large databases. These investigations have revealed a preferred search strategy to enrich database selection sets with target‐selective compounds. The selectivity sets reported here are made publicly available to support the development of other computational tools for applications in chemical biology and medicinal chemistry.

[1]  M. Murcko,et al.  Chemogenomic approaches to drug discovery. , 2001, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[2]  Xi Chen,et al.  The Binding Database: data management and interface design , 2002, Bioinform..

[3]  William Stafford Noble,et al.  Matrix2png: a utility for visualizing matrix data , 2003, Bioinform..

[4]  Pierre Acklin,et al.  Similarity Metrics for Ligands Reflecting the Similarity of the Target Proteins , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[5]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Molecular Similarity Searching Using Atom Environments, Information-Based Feature Selection, and a Naïve Bayesian Classifier , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[6]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Similarity Searching of Chemical Databases Using Atom Environment Descriptors (MOLPRINT 2D): Evaluation of Performance , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[7]  B. Stockwell Exploring biology with small organic molecules , 2004, Nature.

[8]  E. Jacoby,et al.  Chemogenomics: an emerging strategy for rapid target and drug discovery , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[9]  Xiaoyang Xia,et al.  Classification of kinase inhibitors using a Bayesian model. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[10]  Jérôme Hert,et al.  Comparison of Fingerprint-Based Methods for Virtual Screening Using Multiple Bioactive Reference Structures , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[11]  David R Spring,et al.  Chemical genetics to chemical genomics: small molecules offer big insights. , 2005, Chemical Society reviews.

[12]  P. Willett Searching techniques for databases of two- and three-dimensional chemical structures. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[13]  Zhan Deng,et al.  Interaction profiles of protein kinase-inhibitor complexes and their application to virtual screening. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[14]  Meir Glick,et al.  Prediction of Biological Targets for Compounds Using Multiple-Category Bayesian Models Trained on Chemogenomics Databases , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[15]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Robust ligand-based modeling of the biological targets of known drugs. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[16]  G. V. Paolini,et al.  Global mapping of pharmacological space , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[17]  Scott Boyer,et al.  Ligand-Based Approach to In Silico Pharmacology: Nuclear Receptor Profiling , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[18]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Methods for Computer‐aided Chemical Biology. Part 2: Evaluation of Compound Selectivity Using 2D Molecular Fingerprints , 2007, Chemical biology & drug design.

[19]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Methods for Computer‐aided Chemical Biology. Part 1: Design of a Benchmark System for the Evaluation of Compound Selectivity , 2007, Chemical biology & drug design.

[20]  Xin Wen,et al.  BindingDB: a web-accessible database of experimentally determined protein–ligand binding affinities , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[21]  Michael J. Keiser,et al.  Relating protein pharmacology by ligand chemistry , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[22]  Wolfgang Guba,et al.  From astemizole to a novel hit series of small-molecule somatostatin 5 receptor antagonists via GPCR affinity profiling. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[23]  J. Bajorath Computational analysis of ligand relationships within target families. , 2008, Current opinion in chemical biology.