High-throughput and in silico screenings in drug discovery

Background: In the current situation of weak drug pipelines, impending patent expiration of several blockbuster drugs, industry consolidation and changing business models that target special diseases like cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's and obesity, the pharmaceutical industry is under intense pressure to generate a strong drug pipeline distinguished by better productivity, diversity and cost effectiveness. The goal is discovering high-quality leads in the initial stages of the development cycle, to minimize the costs associated with failures at later ones. Objective: Thus, there is a great amount of interest in further developing and optimizing high-throughput screening and in silico screening, the two methods responsible for generating most of the lead compounds. Although high-throughput screening is the predominant starting point for discovery programs, in silico methods have gradually made inroads by their more rational approach, to expedite the drug discovery and development process. Conclusion: Modern drug discovery strategies include both methods in tandem or in an iterative way. This review primarily provides a succinct overview and comparison of experimental and in silico screening techniques, selected case studies where both methods were used in concert to investigate their performance and complementary nature and a statement on the developments in experimental and in silico approaches in the near future.

[1]  J. Broach,et al.  High-throughput screening for drug discovery. , 1996, Nature.

[2]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  Integration of Virtual Screening with High-Throughput Flow Cytometry to Identify Novel Small Molecule Formylpeptide Receptor Antagonistss⃞ , 2005, Molecular Pharmacology.

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

[4]  Bohdan Waszkowycz,et al.  Towards improving compound selection in structure-based virtual screening. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[5]  G Wolber,et al.  Enhancing drug discovery through in silico screening: strategies to increase true positives retrieval rates. , 2008, Current medicinal chemistry.

[6]  Xianyue Ma,et al.  Identification of 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexabromocyclohexane as a small molecule inhibitor of jak2 tyrosine kinase autophosphorylation [correction of autophophorylation]. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[7]  J. An,et al.  Structure-based virtual screening of chemical libraries for drug discovery. , 2006, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[8]  G. Keserű,et al.  Comparative virtual and experimental high-throughput screening for glycogen synthase kinase-3beta inhibitors. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  Somesh D. Sharma,et al.  Managing protein flexibility in docking and its applications. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[10]  Ajay N. Jain Effects of protein conformation in docking: improved pose prediction through protein pocket adaptation , 2009, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[11]  Sharangdhar S. Phatak,et al.  6-Methoxy-N-alkyl isatin acylhydrazone derivatives as a novel series of potent selective cannabinoid receptor 2 inverse agonists: design, synthesis, and binding mode prediction. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[12]  S D Pickett,et al.  Design of a compound screening collection for use in high throughput screening. , 2004, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[13]  D. Vanderwall,et al.  Inhibitors of dihydrodipicolinate reductase, a key enzyme of the diaminopimelate pathway of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. , 2001, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[14]  György M Keseru,et al.  Hit discovery and hit-to-lead approaches. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

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

[16]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Structure-based development of target-specific compound libraries. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[17]  Maria Paola Costi,et al.  Comprehensive mechanistic analysis of hits from high-throughput and docking screens against beta-lactamase. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[18]  Meir Glick,et al.  Streamlining lead discovery by aligning in silico and high-throughput screening. , 2006, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[19]  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.

[20]  Aurélien Grosdidier,et al.  Docking, virtual high throughput screening and in silico fragment-based drug design , 2009, Journal of cellular and molecular medicine.

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

[22]  Chris L Waller,et al.  Strategies to support drug discovery through integration of systems and data. , 2007, Drug discovery today.

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

[24]  Gianni Chessari,et al.  Application of fragment screening by X-ray crystallography to beta-secretase. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[25]  Dawoon Jung,et al.  Discovery of a novel class of reversible non-peptide caspase inhibitors via a structure-based approach. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[26]  Keith T. Butler,et al.  Toward accurate relative energy predictions of the bioactive conformation of drugs , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[27]  Lorenz M Mayr,et al.  The Future of High-Throughput Screening , 2008, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[28]  Michael K. Gilson,et al.  Screening Drug-Like Compounds by Docking to Homology Models: A Systematic Study , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[29]  Christopher P Austin,et al.  High-throughput screening assays for the identification of chemical probes. , 2007, Nature chemical biology.

[30]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Discovery of novel chemotypes to a G-protein-coupled receptor through ligand-steered homology modeling and structure-based virtual screening. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[31]  Robert Powers,et al.  Identification of novel estrogen receptor α antagonists , 2004, The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[32]  Hongmao Sun,et al.  A Universal Molecular Descriptor System for Prediction of LogP, LogS, LogBB, and Absorption , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[33]  International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome , 2004 .

[34]  Ulrich Rester,et al.  Dock around the Clock – Current Status of Small Molecule Docking and Scoring , 2006 .

[35]  Andy Jennings,et al.  Discovery strategies in a pharmaceutical setting: the application of computational techniques , 2006, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[36]  Stephen R. Johnson,et al.  Grid computing in large pharmaceutical molecular modeling. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[37]  Lars Karlsson,et al.  Identification of a Potent and Selective Noncovalent Cathepsin S Inhibitor , 2004, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.

[38]  J. Drews Drug discovery: a historical perspective. , 2000, Science.

[39]  Vladimir Makarenkov,et al.  Using Clustering Techniques to Improve Hit Selection in High-Throughput Screening , 2006, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[40]  Dora M Schnur Recent trends in library design: 'rational design' revisited. , 2008, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[41]  Christopher R. Corbeil,et al.  Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules. 2. Development and Application of Fitted 1.5 to the Virtual Screening of Potential HCV Polymerase Inhibitors , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[42]  F. Collins,et al.  Transforming Environmental Health Protection , 2008, Science.

[43]  G. Klebe Virtual ligand screening: strategies, perspectives and limitations , 2006, Drug Discovery Today.

[44]  Christopher R. Corbeil,et al.  Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules. 3. Impact of Input Ligand Conformation, Protein Flexibility, and Water Molecules on the Accuracy of Docking Programs , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[45]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function , 1998 .

[46]  Robert Powers,et al.  Identification of novel estrogen receptor alpha antagonists. , 2004, The Journal of steroid biochemistry and molecular biology.

[47]  Anders Karlén,et al.  Is it possible to increase hit rates in structure-based virtual screening by pharmacophore filtering? An investigation of the advantages and pitfalls of post-filtering. , 2008, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[48]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Homology modeling in drug discovery: current trends and applications. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[49]  J Mestres Virtual screening: a real screening complement to high-throughput screening. , 2002, Biochemical Society transactions.

[50]  A. Persidis High-throughput screening , 1998, Bio/Technology.

[51]  P. Fischer,et al.  Computational chemistry approaches to drug discovery in signal transduction , 2008, Biotechnology journal.

[52]  Bert Gunter,et al.  Improved Statistical Methods for Hit Selection in High-Throughput Screening , 2003, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[53]  Sandra Fox,et al.  High-Throughput Screening: Update on Practices and Success , 2006, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[54]  Hugo O Villar,et al.  Computational techniques in fragment based drug discovery. , 2007, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[55]  C. Harris,et al.  How large does a compound screening collection need to be? , 2008, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[56]  Gavin Harper,et al.  Methods for mining HTS data. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[57]  Claudio N Cavasotto,et al.  In silico identification of novel EGFR inhibitors with antiproliferative activity against cancer cells. , 2006, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[58]  Jing Chen,et al.  Pocket v.2: Further Developments on Receptor-Based Pharmacophore Modeling , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[59]  Herbert Köppen Virtual screening - what does it give us? , 2009, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

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

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

[62]  Magdalena Bacilieri,et al.  Ligand-based drug design methodologies in drug discovery process: an overview. , 2006, Current drug discovery technologies.

[63]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function , 1998, J. Comput. Chem..

[64]  Johannes H. Voigt,et al.  Cross-Docking of Inhibitors into CDK2 Structures. 1 , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[65]  Brian K Shoichet,et al.  Prediction of protein-ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: successes and gaps. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[66]  Anirban Mahapatra Screening for success. , 2008, ACS chemical biology.

[67]  F. Guerlesquin,et al.  Protein–protein interaction inhibition (2P2I) combining high throughput and virtual screening: Application to the HIV-1 Nef protein , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[68]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  Strategies for compound selection. , 2004, Current drug discovery technologies.

[69]  Rajarshi Guha,et al.  On the interpretation and interpretability of quantitative structure–activity relationship models , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[70]  Anang A Shelat,et al.  Scaffold composition and biological relevance of screening libraries. , 2007, Nature chemical biology.

[71]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[72]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. , 2001, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[73]  P. Hajduk,et al.  Predicting protein druggability. , 2005, Drug discovery today.

[74]  A. Carnero,et al.  High throughput screening in drug discovery , 2006, Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico.

[75]  Bissan Al‐Lazikani,et al.  QSAR (Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship) , 2004 .

[76]  Haruki Nakamura,et al.  A method to enhance the hit ratio by a combination of structure-based drug screening and ligand-based screening , 2008, Advances and applications in bioinformatics and chemistry : AABC.

[77]  D. Tweardy,et al.  Chemical Probes that Competitively and Selectively Inhibit Stat3 Activation , 2009, PloS one.

[78]  W. L. Jorgensen The Many Roles of Computation in Drug Discovery , 2004, Science.

[79]  Stefano Costanzi,et al.  Ligand and structure-based methodologies for the prediction of the activity of G protein-coupled receptor ligands , 2009, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[80]  György M. Keserü,et al.  The influence of lead discovery strategies on the properties of drug candidates , 2009, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[81]  Hongma Sun,et al.  Pharmacophore-based virtual screening. , 2008, Current medicinal chemistry.

[82]  Claudio N. Cavasotto and Narender Singh Docking and High Throughput Docking: Successes and the Challenge of Protein Flexibility , 2008 .

[83]  William Seibel,et al.  Theoretical and practical considerations in virtual screening: a beaten field? , 2008, Current medicinal chemistry.

[84]  T. Klabunde,et al.  Structure-based drug discovery using GPCR homology modeling: successful virtual screening for antagonists of the alpha1A adrenergic receptor. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[85]  Jaroslaw Polanski,et al.  Receptor dependent multidimensional QSAR for modeling drug--receptor interactions. , 2009, Current medicinal chemistry.

[86]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Molecular docking and ligand specificity in fragment-based inhibitor discovery. , 2009, Nature chemical biology.

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

[88]  Thomas D. Y. Chung,et al.  A Simple Statistical Parameter for Use in Evaluation and Validation of High Throughput Screening Assays , 1999, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[89]  Tomas Lundqvist The devil is still in the details--driving early drug discovery forward with biophysical experimental methods. , 2005, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[90]  Xianyue Ma,et al.  Identification of 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexabromocyclohexane as a small molecule inhibitor of Jak2 tyrosine kinase autophophorylation , 2005 .

[91]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Scoring functions for protein-ligand docking. , 2006, Current protein & peptide science.

[92]  J. Bonfield,et al.  Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome , 2004, Nature.

[93]  Christine Humblet,et al.  Lead optimization via high-throughput molecular docking. , 2007, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[94]  Julian Tirado-Rives,et al.  Contribution of conformer focusing to the uncertainty in predicting free energies for protein-ligand binding. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[96]  Johannes H. Voigt,et al.  Cross-Docking of Inhibitors into CDK2 Structures. 2 , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[97]  G. Klebe,et al.  Successful virtual screening for a submicromolar antagonist of the neurokinin-1 receptor based on a ligand-supported homology model. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[98]  David L Mobley,et al.  Treating entropy and conformational changes in implicit solvent simulations of small molecules. , 2008, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[99]  Dawoon Jung,et al.  Virtual docking approaches to protein kinase B inhibition. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[100]  John P. Overington,et al.  How many drug targets are there? , 2006, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[101]  M. Entzeroth,et al.  Emerging trends in high-throughput screening. , 2003, Current opinion in pharmacology.

[102]  Gilles Marcou,et al.  Hot-Spots-Guided Receptor-Based Pharmacophores (HS-Pharm): A Knowledge-Based Approach to Identify Ligand-Anchoring Atoms in Protein Cavities and Prioritize Structure-Based Pharmacophores , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[103]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  2,3‐Dihydro‐1‐Benzofuran Derivatives as a Series of Potent Selective Cannabinoid Receptor 2 Agonists: Design, Synthesis, and Binding Mode Prediction through Ligand‐Steered Modeling , 2009, ChemMedChem.

[104]  Campbell McInnes,et al.  Virtual screening strategies in drug discovery. , 2007, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[105]  Jonas Boström,et al.  Computational chemistry-driven decision making in lead generation. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[106]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[107]  Martin J Stoermer Current status of virtual screening as analysed by target class. , 2006, Medicinal chemistry (Shariqah (United Arab Emirates)).

[108]  G. Oliva,et al.  Virtual screening and its integration with modern drug design technologies. , 2008, Current medicinal chemistry.

[109]  Sam Michael,et al.  Compound Management for Quantitative High-Throughput Screening , 2008, JALA.

[110]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Virtual screening of chemical libraries , 2004, Nature.

[111]  James Inglese,et al.  Reporting data from high-throughput screening of small-molecule libraries. , 2007, Nature chemical biology.

[112]  James A. Lumley,et al.  Compound selection and filtering in library design , 2005 .

[113]  Stephen D. Pickett,et al.  Research Papers) Design of a Compound Screening Collection for use in High Throughput Screening , 2004 .

[114]  X. Barril,et al.  Incorporating protein flexibility into docking and structure-based drug design , 2006, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[115]  M. Drysdale,et al.  Discovery of a potent CDK2 inhibitor with a novel binding mode, using virtual screening and initial, structure-guided lead scoping. , 2007, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[116]  Olivier Sperandio,et al.  Free resources to assist structure-based virtual ligand screening experiments. , 2007, Current protein & peptide science.

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

[118]  Robert Nadon,et al.  Statistical practice in high-throughput screening data analysis , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[119]  P. Hajduk,et al.  A decade of fragment-based drug design: strategic advances and lessons learned , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.