Comparison of Fingerprint-Based Methods for Virtual Screening Using Multiple Bioactive Reference Structures

Fingerprint-based similarity searching is widely used for virtual screening when only a single bioactive reference structure is available. This paper reviews three distinct ways of carrying out such searches when multiple bioactive reference structures are available: merging the individual fingerprints into a single combined fingerprint; applying data fusion to the similarity rankings resulting from individual similarity searches; and approximations to substructural analysis. Extended searches on the MDL Drug Data Report database suggest that fusing similarity scores is the most effective general approach, with the best individual results coming from the binary kernel discrimination technique.

[1]  J. Mason,et al.  New 4-point pharmacophore method for molecular similarity and diversity applications: overview of the method and applications, including a novel approach to the design of combinatorial libraries containing privileged substructures. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[2]  R. Venkataraghavan,et al.  Atom pairs as molecular features in structure-activity studies: definition and applications , 1985, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Y. Martin,et al.  Do structurally similar molecules have similar biological activity? , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  Naomie Salim,et al.  Analysis and Display of the Size Dependence of Chemical Similarity Coefficients , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[5]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Profile Scaling Increases the Similarity Search Performance of Molecular Fingerprints Containing Numerical Descriptors and Structural Keys , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[6]  David Weininger,et al.  Stigmata: An Algorithm To Determine Structural Commonalities in Diverse Datasets , 1996, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[7]  Robert D Clark,et al.  Neighborhood behavior: a useful concept for validation of "molecular diversity" descriptors. , 1996, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[8]  Peter Willett,et al.  Comparison of fragment weighting schemes for substructural analysis , 1989 .

[9]  Naomie Salim,et al.  Combination of Fingerprint-Based Similarity Coefficients Using Data Fusion , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Xin Chen,et al.  Performance of Similarity Measures in 2D Fragment-Based Similarity Searching: Comparison of Structural Descriptors and Similarity Coefficients , 2002, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[11]  Robert P. Sheridan.  Finding Multiactivity Substructures by Mining Databases of Drug-Like Compounds , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[12]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Fingerprint Scaling Increases the Probability of Identifying Molecules with Similar Activity in Virtual Screening Calculations , 2001, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[13]  Joseph S. Verducci,et al.  A Modification of the Jaccard–Tanimoto Similarity Index for Diverse Selection of Chemical Compounds Using Binary Strings , 2002, Technometrics.

[14]  Peter Willett,et al.  Promoting Access to White Rose Research Papers Effectiveness of Graph-based and Fingerprint-based Similarity Measures for Virtual Screening of 2d Chemical Structure Databases , 2022 .

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

[16]  Ruedi Stoop,et al.  An Ontology for Pharmaceutical Ligands and Its Application for in Silico Screening and Library Design , 2002, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Peter Willett,et al.  Comparison of Ranking Methods for Virtual Screening in Lead-Discovery Programs , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[18]  C E Berkoff,et al.  Substructural analysis. A novel approach to the problem of drug design. , 1974, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  How Does Consensus Scoring Work for Virtual Library Screening? An Idealized Computer Experiment , 2001, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[20]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Combinatorial Preferences Affect Molecular Similarity/Diversity Calculations Using Binary Fingerprints and Tanimoto Coefficients , 2000, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[21]  Darren R. Flower,et al.  On the Properties of Bit String-Based Measures of Chemical Similarity , 1998, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[22]  Peter Willett,et al.  Implementation of nearest-neighbor searching in an online chemical structure search system , 1986, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[23]  R D Hull,et al.  Mining the chemical quarry with joint chemical probes: an application of latent semantic structure indexing (LaSSI) and TOPOSIM (Dice) to chemical database mining. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[24]  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.

[25]  Robert P Sheridan,et al.  Why do we need so many chemical similarity search methods? , 2002, Drug discovery today.

[26]  John M. Barnard,et al.  Chemical Similarity Searching , 1998, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[27]  Darren V. S. Green,et al.  Prediction of Biological Activity for High-Throughput Screening Using Binary Kernel Discrimination , 2001, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..