Novel Receptor Surface Approach for 3D-QSAR: The Weighted Probe Interaction Energy Method

A 3D-QSAR technique, called the WeP (weighted probe interaction energy) method, has been developed based on the notion that certain regions of the receptor surface contribute, to varying extents, to the differences in the activities of the ligands, while other regions do not. The probes, placed around the surface of a superimposed set of ligands, were associated with fractional weights, and then an optimal distribution of probe weights that accounts for the activity profile of the training ligands was determined using a genetic algorithm. It has been shown for the three test samples that the pseudoreceptors, which consist of the surviving probes with nonzero weight values, have good predictabilities. Especially, in the case of dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors, the pseudoreceptor resembles the real protein in that there is no surviving probe in the solvent-exposed region.

[1]  A. Doweyko,et al.  The hypothetical active site lattice. An approach to modelling active sites from data on inhibitor molecules. , 1988, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[2]  J. Gasteiger,et al.  ITERATIVE PARTIAL EQUALIZATION OF ORBITAL ELECTRONEGATIVITY – A RAPID ACCESS TO ATOMIC CHARGES , 1980 .

[3]  J. Kraut,et al.  Crystal structures of recombinant human dihydrofolate reductase complexed with folate and 5-deazafolate. , 1990, Biochemistry.

[4]  Max Dobler,et al.  5D-QSAR: the key for simulating induced fit? , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[5]  Chong Hak Chae,et al.  Conformational analyses of thiamin-related compounds. A stereochemical model for thiamin catalysis , 1993 .

[6]  Nouri Neamati,et al.  Application of CoMFA and CoMSIA 3D-QSAR and docking studies in optimization of mercaptobenzenesulfonamides as HIV-1 integrase inhibitors. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[7]  Hongming Chen,et al.  PARM: A Genetic Evolved Algorithm To Predict Bioactivity , 1998, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[8]  D. Walters,et al.  Genetically evolved receptor models: a computational approach to construction of receptor models. , 1994, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  Ki Hwan Kim,et al.  Use of the hydrogen bond potential function in a comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA) on a set of benzodiazepines , 1993, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[10]  M Karplus,et al.  Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships from molecular similarity matrices and genetic neural networks. 2. Applications. , 1997, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[11]  A Tropsha,et al.  Cross-validated R2-guided region selection for comparative molecular field analysis: a simple method to achieve consistent results. , 1995, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[12]  Peter Zbinden,et al.  Quasi-Atomistic Receptor Surface Models: A Bridge between 3-D QSAR and Receptor Modeling , 1998 .

[13]  R. Cramer,et al.  Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. , 1988, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[14]  A. N. Jain,et al.  Compass: predicting biological activities from molecular surface properties. Performance comparisons on a steroid benchmark. , 1994, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[15]  J Pei,et al.  PARM: a practical utility for drug design. , 2001, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[16]  Aris Floratos,et al.  QSAR in grossly underdetermined systems : Opportunities and issues Regression , 2001 .

[17]  H Briem,et al.  Multiple-conformation and protonation-state representation in 4D-QSAR: the neurokinin-1 receptor system. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[18]  M. Brandsch,et al.  Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship analyses of peptide substrates of the mammalian H+/peptide cotransporter PEPT1. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  A. Hopfinger,et al.  Construction of 3D-QSAR Models Using the 4D-QSAR Analysis Formalism , 1997 .

[20]  M Pastor,et al.  Smart region definition: a new way to improve the predictive ability and interpretability of three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships. , 1997, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[21]  William E. Lorensen,et al.  Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm , 1987, SIGGRAPH.

[22]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  A 3D QSAR Study on a Set of Dopamine D4 Receptor Antagonists , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[23]  S. Pickett,et al.  GRid-INdependent descriptors (GRIND): a novel class of alignment-independent three-dimensional molecular descriptors. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[24]  E LorensenWilliam,et al.  Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm , 1987 .

[25]  H. Kubinyi,et al.  Three-dimensional quantitative similarity-activity relationships (3D QSiAR) from SEAL similarity matrices. , 1998, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[26]  Walter M. F. Fabian,et al.  Enantioselectivity of epoxide hydrolase catalysed oxirane ring opening: a 3D QSAR Study , 2003, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[27]  Bruce L. Bush,et al.  Sample-distance partial least squares: PLS optimized for many variables, with application to CoMFA , 1993, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[28]  J. Gasteiger,et al.  Autocorrelation of Molecular Surface Properties for Modeling Corticosteroid Binding Globulin and Cytosolic Ah Receptor Activity by Neural Networks , 1995 .

[29]  D. Rogers,et al.  Receptor surface models. 2. Application to quantitative structure-activity relationships studies. , 1995, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[30]  Jaroslaw Polanski,et al.  The Comparative Molecular Surface Analysis (COMSA) - A Nongrid 3D QSAR Method by a Coupled Neural Network and PLS System: Predicting pKa Values of Benzoic and Alkanoic Acids , 2002, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[31]  G. Klebe,et al.  Molecular similarity indices in a comparative analysis (CoMSIA) of drug molecules to correlate and predict their biological activity. , 1994, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[32]  Roberto Todeschini,et al.  MS-WHIM, new 3D theoretical descriptors derived from molecular surface properties: A comparative 3D QSAR study in a series of steroids , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[33]  S. Safe,et al.  Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs), dibenzofurans (PCDFs), and related compounds: environmental and mechanistic considerations which support the development of toxic equivalency factors (TEFs). , 1990, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[34]  R. Wade,et al.  Prediction of drug binding affinities by comparative binding energy analysis , 1995 .

[35]  M. Hahn.  Receptor surface models. 1. Definition and construction. , 1995, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[36]  W. Richards,et al.  Self-organizing molecular field analysis: a tool for structure-activity studies. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[37]  U. Singh,et al.  A NEW FORCE FIELD FOR MOLECULAR MECHANICAL SIMULATION OF NUCLEIC ACIDS AND PROTEINS , 1984 .

[38]  Wolfgang Heiden,et al.  Fast generation of molecular surfaces from 3D data fields with an enhanced “marching cube” algorithm , 1993, J. Comput. Chem..

[39]  Jianfeng Pei,et al.  3D-QSAR and Receptor Modeling of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors with Flexible Atom Receptor Model (FLARM) , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[40]  G. Cruciani,et al.  Comparative molecular field analysis using GRID force-field and GOLPE variable selection methods in a study of inhibitors of glycogen phosphorylase b. , 1994, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[41]  R. Wade,et al.  Comparative binding energy (COMBINE) analysis of influenza neuraminidase-inhibitor complexes. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.