Practical database screening with docking tools.

As an increasing number of pharmaceutically relevant target 3D structures is becoming available, efficient techniques for exploiting the information contained in these structures gain importance over massive experimental screening (Bailey and Brown 2001). One of these techniques is virtual screening through docking calculations, i.e., the search for those compounds in a database of small organic compounds that display favorable steric as well as electrostatic interactions to the target binding site (Walters et al. 1998; Stahl 2000; Good 2001). Docking programs consist of two essential parts: an algorithm that searches the conformational, rotational, and translational space available to a candidate molecule within the binding site, and an objective function that is to be minimized during this process: a crude measure of binding affinity or receptor-ligand complementarity usually referred to as a scoring function. In order to be successful as a virtual screening tool, a docking program must be able to find optimum docking solutions for active molecules in accordance with experiment, it should be able to separate active compounds from inactive ones, and it should use no more than 2–3 min of CPU time per compound to be applicable to large libraries.

[1]  Martin Stahl,et al.  Structure‐Based Library Design , 2000 .

[2]  D. Rognan,et al.  Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. 1. Evaluation of different docking/scoring combinations. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[3]  M Rarey,et al.  Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  Ingo Muegge,et al.  Evaluation of docking/scoring approaches: A comparative study based on MMP3 inhibitors , 2000, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[5]  Mark A. Murcko,et al.  Virtual screening : an overview , 1998 .

[6]  Matthias Rarey,et al.  Small Molecule Docking and Scoring , 2001 .

[7]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Identification of ligands for RNA targets via structure-based virtual screening: HIV-1 TAR , 2000, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

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

[9]  Tim D. J. Perkins,et al.  New Approach to Molecular Docking and Its Application to Virtual Screening of Chemical Databases , 2000, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[10]  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..

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

[12]  A Good,et al.  Structure-based virtual screening protocols. , 2001, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[13]  Jeremy R. H. Tame,et al.  Scoring functions: A view from the bench , 1999, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[14]  Y. Martin,et al.  A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[15]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Statistical analysis of computational docking of large compound data bases to distinct protein binding sites , 1999, J. Comput. Chem..

[16]  D. Kostrewa,et al.  Novel inhibitors of DNA gyrase: 3D structure based biased needle screening, hit validation by biophysical methods, and 3D guided optimization. A promising alternative to random screening. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[17]  M Stahl,et al.  Development of filter functions for protein-ligand docking. , 1998, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[18]  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.

[19]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Placement of medium-sized molecular fragments into active sites of proteins , 1996, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[20]  Hans-Joachim Böhm,et al.  The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure , 1994, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[21]  Ajay,et al.  Computational methods to predict binding free energy in ligand-receptor complexes. , 1995, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  Subnanomolar Inhibitors from Computer Screening: A Model Study Using Human Carbonic Anhydrase II. , 2001, Angewandte Chemie.

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

[24]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Multiple automatic base selection: Protein–ligand docking based on incremental construction without manual intervention , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[25]  G. Klebe,et al.  Statistical potentials and scoring functions applied to protein-ligand binding. , 2001, Current opinion in structural biology.

[26]  D. Bailey,et al.  High-throughput chemistry and structure-based design: survival of the smartest. , 2001, Drug discovery today.

[27]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Docking of hydrophobic ligands with interaction-based matching algorithms , 1999, German Conference on Bioinformatics.

[28]  D. E. Clark,et al.  Flexible docking using tabu search and an empirical estimate of binding affinity , 1998, Proteins.

[29]  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.