Virtual Screening for the Discovery of Active Principles from Natural Products

Computational methods are a powerful knowledge-based a approach that helps to select plant material or natural products (NP) with an increased likelihood for biological activity. These methods enable the rationalization of biological activities of NP and contribute to putative protein-ligand binding characteristics of these molecules. In this way, focusing on information about highly ranked virtual hits from properly validated in silico models is a rationale to streamline experimental efforts. In silico approaches can focus on well-known constituents of herbal remedies as well as on any natural compound with relevant biological effects directly retrieved from the literature. They might further be helpful for the selection of promising starting material for an experimental work-up. This chapter provides a general overview to students and researchers, who will step in this emerging and exciting field of science. It gives a brief introduction into the field of cheminformatics and presents different virtual screening strategies implemented in pharmacognostic workflows to point out opportunities and challenges in NP-based drug discovery.

[1]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Ligand docking and structure-based virtual screening in drug discovery. , 2007, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[2]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Molecular Similarity Concepts for Informatics Applications. , 2017, Methods in molecular biology.

[3]  Jaap Heringa,et al.  SEQATOMS: a web tool for identifying missing regions in PDB in sequence context , 2008, Nucleic Acids Res..

[4]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Automating drug discovery , 2017, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[5]  D. Pompliano,et al.  Drugs for bad bugs: confronting the challenges of antibacterial discovery , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[6]  R. Bauer,et al.  Polyacetylenes from Notopterygium incisum–New Selective Partial Agonists of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-Gamma , 2013, PloS one.

[7]  J. Kirchmair,et al.  Data Resources for the Computer-Guided Discovery of Bioactive Natural Products , 2017, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[9]  J. Gasteiger,et al.  Chemoinformatics: A Textbook , 2003 .

[10]  J. Irwin,et al.  Lead discovery using molecular docking. , 2002, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[11]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Follow up: Advancing the activity cliff concept, part II , 2014, F1000Research.

[12]  Yuan-Ping Pang,et al.  Prediction of the binding sites of huperzine A in acetylcholinesterase by docking studies , 1994, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[13]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Selected Concepts and Investigations in Compound Classification, Molecular Descriptor Analysis, and Virtual Screening , 2001, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[14]  R. Bauer,et al.  Drugs from nature targeting inflammation (DNTI): a successful Austrian interdisciplinary network project , 2016, Monatshefte für Chemie - Chemical Monthly.

[15]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Recent advances in ligand-based drug design: relevance and utility of the conformationally sampled pharmacophore approach. , 2011, Current computer-aided drug design.

[16]  Kathryn M Hart,et al.  Discovery of multiple hidden allosteric sites by combining Markov state models and experiments , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Gerhard Wolber,et al.  Arginase Structure and Inhibition: Catalytic Site Plasticity Reveals New Modulation Possibilities , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[18]  Stefano Moro,et al.  Bridging Molecular Docking to Membrane Molecular Dynamics To Investigate GPCR-Ligand Recognition: The Human A2A Adenosine Receptor as a Key Study , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[19]  Yun He,et al.  Learning from the Data: Mining of Large High-Throughput Screening Databases , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[20]  T. Langer,et al.  Strategies for efficient lead structure discovery from natural products. , 2006, Current medicinal chemistry.

[21]  Adam Nelson,et al.  Natural products as an inspiration in the diversity-oriented synthesis of bioactive compound libraries , 2008, Natural product reports.

[22]  Christoph Steinbeck,et al.  Natural product-likeness score revisited: an open-source, open-data implementation , 2012, BMC Bioinformatics.

[23]  Björn Windshügel,et al.  LEADS-PEP: A Benchmark Data Set for Assessment of Peptide Docking Performance , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[24]  F. Brown Chapter 35 – Chemoinformatics: What is it and How does it Impact Drug Discovery. , 1998 .

[25]  Roberto Todeschini,et al.  Towards Global QSAR Model Building for Acute Toxicity: Munro Database Case Study , 2014, International journal of molecular sciences.

[26]  N. Nikolova,et al.  International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, LUMO energy ± The Lowest Unoccupied Molecular Orbital (LUMO) , 2022 .

[27]  J. Rollinger,et al.  Natural products modulating the hERG channel: heartaches and hope† †Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c7np00014f , 2017, Natural product reports.

[28]  J. A. Grant,et al.  A shape-based 3-D scaffold hopping method and its application to a bacterial protein-protein interaction. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[29]  Haruki Nakamura,et al.  Remediation of the protein data bank archive , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[30]  N. Cohen,et al.  Structure-based drug design and the discovery of aliskiren (Tekturna): perseverance and creativity to overcome a R&D pipeline challenge. , 2007, Chemical biology & drug design.

[31]  Sichao Wang,et al.  Recent developments in computational prediction of HERG blockage. , 2013, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[32]  Alexander S. Hauser,et al.  GPCRdb in 2018: adding GPCR structure models and ligands , 2017, Nucleic Acids Res..

[33]  Thierry Langer,et al.  Combining Ethnopharmacology and Virtual Screening for Lead Structure Discovery: COX-Inhibitors as Application Example , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[34]  Jens Meiler,et al.  Autocorrelation descriptor improvements for QSAR: 2DA_Sign and 3DA_Sign , 2016, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[35]  Igor V Tetko,et al.  The WWW as a tool to obtain molecular parameters. , 2003, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[36]  Kangyu Chen,et al.  Stepwise high-throughput virtual screening of Rho kinase inhibitors from natural product library and potential therapeutics for pulmonary hypertension , 2015, Pharmaceutical biology.

[37]  Ricardo Macarron,et al.  Critical review of the role of HTS in drug discovery. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[38]  Dan Li,et al.  Comprehensive evaluation of ten docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes: the prediction accuracy of sampling power and scoring power. , 2016, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[39]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[40]  Christina E. Mair,et al.  hERG Channel Blocking Ipecac Alkaloids Identified by Combined In Silico – In Vitro Screening , 2016, Planta Medica.

[41]  Aurélien Grosdidier,et al.  SwissDock, a protein-small molecule docking web service based on EADock DSS , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[42]  Tingjun Hou,et al.  Assessing an Ensemble Docking-Based Virtual Screening Strategy for Kinase Targets by Considering Protein Flexibility , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[43]  Strohl,et al.  The role of natural products in a modern drug discovery program. , 2000, Drug discovery today.

[44]  Daisuke Kihara,et al.  Three-Dimensional Compound Comparison Methods and Their Application in Drug Discovery , 2015, Molecules.

[45]  J. Tuszynski,et al.  Software for molecular docking: a review , 2017, Biophysical Reviews.

[46]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Deep Learning in Drug Discovery , 2016, Molecular informatics.

[47]  Thierry Langer,et al.  Parallel Screening: A Novel Concept in Pharmacophore Modeling and Virtual Screening , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[48]  U. Holzgrabe,et al.  Ligand Binding Ensembles Determine Graded Agonist Efficacies at a G Protein-coupled Receptor* , 2016, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[49]  Sean Ekins,et al.  The importance of discerning shape in molecular pharmacology. , 2009, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[50]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Recognizing Pitfalls in Virtual Screening: A Critical Review , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[51]  M. Zehl,et al.  Catechol alkenyls from Semecarpus anacardium: acetylcholinesterase inhibition and binding mode predictions. , 2012, Journal of ethnopharmacology.

[52]  David Lagorce,et al.  FAF‐Drugs4: free ADME‐tox filtering computations for chemical biology and early stages drug discovery , 2017, Bioinform..

[53]  Rajarshi Guha,et al.  Chemoinformatic Analysis of Combinatorial Libraries, Drugs, Natural Products, and Molecular Libraries Small Molecule Repository , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[54]  Matthias Buck,et al.  The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity , 2011 .

[55]  Pedro J. Ballester,et al.  Performance of machine-learning scoring functions in structure-based virtual screening , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[56]  Thierry Langer,et al.  Common Hits Approach: Combining Pharmacophore Modeling and Molecular Dynamics Simulations , 2017, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[57]  Henry Ho,et al.  Discovery of Novel CXCR2 Inhibitors Using Ligand-Based Pharmacophore Models , 2015, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[58]  Stefan Wetzel,et al.  Cheminformatic Analysis of Natural Products and their Chemical Space , 2007 .

[59]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  A comprehensive map of molecular drug targets , 2016, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[60]  S. Free,et al.  A MATHEMATICAL CONTRIBUTION TO STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY STUDIES. , 1964, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[61]  Sjors H. W. Scheres,et al.  Unravelling biological macromolecules with cryo-electron microscopy , 2016, Nature.

[62]  M. Karelson,et al.  Quantum-Chemical Descriptors in QSAR/QSPR Studies. , 1996, Chemical reviews.

[63]  G. Degliesposti,et al.  Binding Estimation after Refinement, a New Automated Procedure for the Refinement and Rescoring of Docked Ligands in Virtual Screening , 2009, Chemical biology & drug design.

[64]  Charlotte M. Deane,et al.  Freely Available Conformer Generation Methods: How Good Are They? , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[65]  C. Ung,et al.  Can an in silico drug-target search method be used to probe potential mechanisms of medicinal plant ingredients? , 2003, Natural product reports.

[66]  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.

[67]  Haruki Nakamura,et al.  Announcing the worldwide Protein Data Bank , 2003, Nature Structural Biology.

[68]  Yoshihiro Yamanishi,et al.  Benchmarking a Wide Range of Chemical Descriptors for Drug‐Target Interaction Prediction Using a Chemogenomic Approach , 2014, Molecular informatics.

[69]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings , 1997 .

[70]  Petra Schneider,et al.  Revealing the macromolecular targets of complex natural products. , 2014, Nature chemistry.

[71]  Thierry Langer,et al.  High-throughput structure-based pharmacophore modelling as a basis for successful parallel virtual screening , 2007, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[72]  Theodora M. Steindl,et al.  Structure-based virtual screening for the discovery of natural inhibitors for human rhinovirus coat protein. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[73]  Daniela Schuster,et al.  Predicting Cyclooxygenase Inhibition by Three‐Dimensional Pharmacophoric Profiling. Part I: Model Generation, Validation and Applicability in Ethnopharmacology , 2010, Molecular informatics.

[74]  Oliver Werz,et al.  Multi-target approach for natural products in inflammation. , 2014, Drug discovery today.

[75]  Lirong Chen,et al.  Use of Natural Products as Chemical Library for Drug Discovery and Network Pharmacology , 2013, PloS one.

[76]  Károly Héberger,et al.  Why is Tanimoto index an appropriate choice for fingerprint-based similarity calculations? , 2015, Journal of Cheminformatics.

[77]  Tian Zhu,et al.  Hit identification and optimization in virtual screening: practical recommendations based on a critical literature analysis. , 2013, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[78]  Igor I. Baskin,et al.  Machine Learning Methods for Property Prediction in Chemoinformatics: Quo Vadis? , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[79]  Gaozhi Chen,et al.  Determination of the binding mode for anti-inflammatory natural product xanthohumol with myeloid differentiation protein 2 , 2016, Drug design, development and therapy.

[80]  Steffen Hering,et al.  Novel scaffolds for modulation of TRPV1 identified with pharmacophore modeling and virtual screening , 2015, Future medicinal chemistry.

[81]  G. Wolber,et al.  Identification of PPARγ Agonists from Natural Sources Using Different In Silico Approaches , 2014, Planta Medica.

[82]  Simona Distinto,et al.  Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection—What can we learn from earlier mistakes? , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[83]  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..

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

[85]  Cícero Nogueira dos Santos,et al.  Boosting Docking-Based Virtual Screening with Deep Learning , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[86]  Russ B Altman,et al.  Machine learning in chemoinformatics and drug discovery. , 2018, Drug discovery today.

[87]  R. M. Muir,et al.  Correlation of Biological Activity of Phenoxyacetic Acids with Hammett Substituent Constants and Partition Coefficients , 1962, Nature.

[88]  Robert P. Sheridan Alternative Global Goodness Metrics and Sensitivity Analysis: Heuristics to Check the Robustness of Conclusions from Studies Comparing Virtual Screening Methods , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[89]  Daniela Schuster,et al.  Pharmacophore-based discovery of FXR-agonists. Part II: Identification of bioactive triterpenes from Ganoderma lucidum , 2011, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[90]  C. Wermuth,et al.  Glossary of terms used in medicinal chemistry (IUPAC Recommendations 1998) , 1998 .

[91]  Antonio Lavecchia,et al.  Machine-learning approaches in drug discovery: methods and applications. , 2015, Drug discovery today.

[92]  Jung-Hsin Lin,et al.  idTarget: a web server for identifying protein targets of small chemical molecules with robust scoring functions and a divide-and-conquer docking approach , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[93]  T Langer,et al.  Integrated in silico tools for exploiting the natural products' bioactivity. , 2006, Planta medica.

[94]  Edward W. Lowe,et al.  Computational Methods in Drug Discovery , 2014, Pharmacological Reviews.

[95]  György M. Keserü,et al.  The Impact of Molecular Dynamics Sampling on the Performance of Virtual Screening against GPCRs , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[96]  David E. Gloriam,et al.  Trends in GPCR drug discovery: new agents, targets and indications , 2017, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[97]  A. Harvey,et al.  The re-emergence of natural products for drug discovery in the genomics era , 2015, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[98]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Recommendations for evaluation of computational methods , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[99]  H. Kokubo,et al.  Exploring the Stability of Ligand Binding Modes to Proteins by Molecular Dynamics Simulations: A Cross-docking Study , 2017, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[100]  Roberto Todeschini,et al.  Handbook of Molecular Descriptors , 2002 .

[101]  Jonathan B Baell,et al.  Feeling Nature's PAINS: Natural Products, Natural Product Drugs, and Pan Assay Interference Compounds (PAINS). , 2016, Journal of natural products.

[102]  W. Pardridge The blood-brain barrier: Bottleneck in brain drug development , 2005, NeuroRx : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics.

[103]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  A Computational Method for Unveiling the Target Promiscuity of Pharmacologically Active Compounds. , 2017, Angewandte Chemie.

[104]  Christopher I. Bayly,et al.  Evaluating Virtual Screening Methods: Good and Bad Metrics for the "Early Recognition" Problem , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[105]  Francisco Corzana,et al.  Unveiling (−)‐Englerin A as a Modulator of L‐Type Calcium Channels , 2016, Angewandte Chemie.

[106]  Daniela Schuster,et al.  Experimentally Validated hERG Pharmacophore Models as Cardiotoxicity Prediction Tools , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[107]  T Langer,et al.  Lead optimization Pharmacophore definition and 3 D searches , 2005 .

[108]  Diane Joseph-McCarthy,et al.  Ensemble-Based Docking Using Biased Molecular Dynamics , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[109]  Jiye Shi,et al.  Like-Charge Guanidinium Pairing between Ligand and Receptor: An Unusual Interaction for Drug Discovery and Design? , 2015, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[110]  Matthew P. Repasky,et al.  Extra precision glide: docking and scoring incorporating a model of hydrophobic enclosure for protein-ligand complexes. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[111]  Stefano Alcaro,et al.  A Pipeline To Enhance Ligand Virtual Screening: Integrating Molecular Dynamics and Fingerprints for Ligand and Proteins , 2015, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[112]  Gang Fu,et al.  PubChem Substance and Compound databases , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

[113]  Clemencia Pinilla,et al.  A Similarity‐based Data‐fusion Approach to the Visual Characterization and Comparison of Compound Databases , 2007, Chemical biology & drug design.

[114]  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.

[115]  Johann Gasteiger,et al.  Chemoinformatics: Achievements and Challenges, a Personal View , 2016, Molecules.

[116]  Spandana Makeneni,et al.  Applying Pose Clustering and MD Simulations To Eliminate False Positives in Molecular Docking , 2018, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[117]  Jung-Keun Suh,et al.  ulti-conformation dynamic pharmacophore modeling of the eroxisome proliferator-activated receptor for the discovery of ovel agonists , 2013 .

[118]  Dik-Lung Ma,et al.  Molecular docking for virtual screening of natural product databases , 2011 .

[119]  Luca Mollica,et al.  Kinetics of protein-ligand unbinding via smoothed potential molecular dynamics simulations , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[120]  Jonathan W. Essex,et al.  A review of protein-small molecule docking methods , 2002, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[121]  Yu-chian Chen Beware of docking! , 2015, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[122]  A. Cavalli,et al.  Role of Molecular Dynamics and Related Methods in Drug Discovery. , 2016, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[123]  D. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking to multiple target structures: Incorporation of protein mobility and structural water heterogeneity in AutoDock , 2002, Proteins.

[124]  T. Langer,et al.  Accessing biological actions of Ganoderma secondary metabolites by in silico profiling. , 2015, Phytochemistry.

[125]  George Papadatos,et al.  The ChEMBL bioactivity database: an update , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[126]  Chun Wu,et al.  Binding of Telomestatin to a Telomeric G-Quadruplex DNA Probed by All-Atom Molecular Dynamics Simulations with Explicit Solvent , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[127]  Matthias Rarey,et al.  Benchmarking Commercial Conformer Ensemble Generators , 2017, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[128]  Ulrich Rester,et al.  From virtuality to reality - Virtual screening in lead discovery and lead optimization: a medicinal chemistry perspective. , 2008, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[129]  Thierry Langer,et al.  Discovering COX-inhibiting constituents of Morus root bark: activity-guided versus computer-aided methods. , 2005, Planta medica.

[130]  William H. Gerwick,et al.  Retrospective analysis of natural products provides insights for future discovery trends , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[131]  Guan Wang,et al.  Thermodynamic and structural characterization of halogen bonding in protein-ligand interactions: a case study of PDE5 and its inhibitors. , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[132]  John P. Overington,et al.  ChEMBL: a large-scale bioactivity database for drug discovery , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[133]  Thomas Seidel,et al.  Strategies for 3D pharmacophore-based virtual screening. , 2010, Drug discovery today. Technologies.

[134]  Violeta I. Pérez-Nueno,et al.  Highly SpecIfic and Sensitive Pharmacophore Model for Identifying CXCR4 Antagonists. Comparison with Docking and Shape-Matching Virtual Screening Performance , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[135]  Thierry Langer,et al.  In silico Target Fishing for Rationalized Ligand Discovery Exemplified on Constituents of Ruta graveolens , 2008, Planta medica.

[136]  David DeCaprio,et al.  Cheminformatics approaches to analyze diversity in compound screening libraries. , 2010, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[137]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Molecular docking and high-throughput screening for novel inhibitors of protein tyrosine phosphatase-1B. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[138]  Daniela Schuster,et al.  Pharmacophore-based discovery of FXR agonists. Part I: Model development and experimental validation , 2011, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[139]  Alexandru T. Balaban Neural Networks in QSAR and Drug Design. Edited by J. Devillers. Volume 2 in the Series: Principles of QSAR and Drug Design. Academic Press: San Diego, 1996, 284 pp. ISBN 0-12-213815-5 , 1997, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[140]  Noel M. O'Boyle Towards a Universal SMILES representation - A standard method to generate canonical SMILES based on the InChI , 2012, Journal of Cheminformatics.

[141]  Weiliang Zhu,et al.  Molecular docking for drug discovery and development: a widely used approach but far from perfect. , 2016, Future medicinal chemistry.

[142]  G. Hessler,et al.  The scaffold hopping potential of pharmacophores. , 2010, Drug discovery today. Technologies.

[143]  T. Klabunde,et al.  GPCR Antitarget Modeling: Pharmacophore Models for Biogenic Amine Binding GPCRs to Avoid GPCR‐Mediated Side Effects , 2005, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[144]  Artem Cherkasov,et al.  Best Practices of Computer-Aided Drug Discovery: Lessons Learned from the Development of a Preclinical Candidate for Prostate Cancer with a New Mechanism of Action , 2017, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[145]  Christophe Chipot,et al.  Standard binding free energies from computer simulations: What is the best strategy? , 2013, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

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

[147]  G. Bifulco,et al.  New steroids with a rearranged skeleton as (h)P300 inhibitors from the sponge Theonella swinhoei. , 2014, Organic letters.

[148]  Michael M. Mysinger,et al.  Directory of Useful Decoys, Enhanced (DUD-E): Better Ligands and Decoys for Better Benchmarking , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[149]  Shuichi Hirono,et al.  Comparison of Consensus Scoring Strategies for Evaluating Computational Models of Protein-Ligand Complexes , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[150]  Stewart A. Adcock,et al.  Molecular dynamics: survey of methods for simulating the activity of proteins. , 2006, Chemical reviews.

[151]  Andreas Evers,et al.  Virtual screening of biogenic amine-binding G-protein coupled receptors: comparative evaluation of protein- and ligand-based virtual screening protocols. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[152]  Klaus R. Liedl,et al.  One Concept, Three Implementations of 3D Pharmacophore-Based Virtual Screening: Distinct Coverage of Chemical Search Space , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

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

[154]  Lorenz C. Blum,et al.  Chemical space as a source for new drugs , 2010 .

[155]  Y. Sugita,et al.  Reaching new levels of realism in modeling biological macromolecules in cellular environments. , 2013, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[156]  Thierry Langer,et al.  In Silico Workflow for the Discovery of Natural Products Activating the G Protein-Coupled Bile Acid Receptor 1 , 2018, Front. Chem..

[157]  J. Rollinger,et al.  Computer-Guided Approach to Access the Anti-influenza Activity of Licorice Constituents , 2013, Journal of natural products.

[158]  Dieter Lang,et al.  Predicting drug metabolism: experiment and/or computation? , 2015, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[159]  Stephen R. Johnson,et al.  Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[160]  John H. Van Drie,et al.  History of 3D pharmacophore searching: commercial, academic and open-source tools. , 2010, Drug discovery today. Technologies.

[161]  Daniela Schuster,et al.  Ligand-Based Pharmacophore Modeling and Virtual Screening for the Discovery of Novel 17β-Hydroxysteroid Dehydrogenase 2 Inhibitors , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[163]  A. Anderson The process of structure-based drug design. , 2003, Chemistry & biology.

[164]  A. Ghose,et al.  A knowledge-based approach in designing combinatorial or medicinal chemistry libraries for drug discovery. 1. A qualitative and quantitative characterization of known drug databases. , 1999, Journal of combinatorial chemistry.

[165]  J. Gostner,et al.  A combinatorial approach for the discovery of cytochrome P450 2D6 inhibitors from nature , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[166]  P. Hawkins,et al.  Comparison of shape-matching and docking as virtual screening tools. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[167]  Danishuddin,et al.  Descriptors and their selection methods in QSAR analysis: paradigm for drug design. , 2016, Drug discovery today.

[168]  Simona Distinto,et al.  How To Optimize Shape-Based Virtual Screening: Choosing the Right Query and Including Chemical Information , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[169]  Sorel Muresan,et al.  ChemGPS-NP: tuned for navigation in biologically relevant chemical space. , 2006, Journal of natural products.

[170]  K. Luthman,et al.  Selective Pharmacophore Models of Dopamine D1 and D2 Full Agonists Based on Extended Pharmacophore Features , 2010, ChemMedChem.

[171]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Advancing the activity cliff concept , 2013 .

[172]  D. Hoekman Exploring QSAR Fundamentals and Applications in Chemistry and Biology, Volume 1. Hydrophobic, Electronic and Steric Constants, Volume 2 J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 9782 , 1996 .

[173]  Judith M. Rollinger,et al.  Accessing target information by virtual parallel screening—The impact on natural product research , 2009 .