Nathan Brown
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Chemoinformatics is an interface science aimed primarily at discovering novel chemical entities that will ultimately result in the development of novel treatments for unmet medical needs, although these same methods are also applied in other fields that ultimately design new molecules. The field combines expertise from, among others, chemistry, biology, physics, biochemistry, statistics, mathematics, and computer science. In this general review of chemoinformatics the emphasis is placed on describing the general methods that are routinely applied in molecular discovery and in a context that provides for an easily accessible article for computer scientists as well as scientists from other numerate disciplines.
- Adam, D. 2002. Chemists synthesize a single naming system. Nature 417, 369.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Bajorath, J., Ed. 2004. Chemoinformatics: Concepts, Methods and Tools for Drug Discovery. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ.Google Scholar
- Balaban, A. T. 1985. Applications of graph theory in chemistry. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 25, 334--343.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barnard, J. M. and Downs, G. M. 1992. Clustering of chemical structures on the basis of two-dimensional similarity measures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 32, 644--649.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bauerschmidt, S. and Gasteiger, J. 1997. Overcoming the limitations of a connection table description: A universal representation of chemical species. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 37, 705--714.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bemis, G. W. and Murcko, M. A. 1996. The properties of known drugs. 1. Molecular frameworks. J. Med. Chem. 39, 2887--2893.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bender, A. and Glen, R. C. 2004. Molecular similarity: A key technique in molecular informatics. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2, 3204--3218.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Böhm, H.-J., Flohr, A., and Stahl, M. 2004. Scaffold hopping. Drug Discov. Today: Tech. 1, 217--224.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brooijmans, N. and Kuntz, I. D. 2003. Molecular recognition and docking algorithms. Ann. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 32, 335--373.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brown, F. K. 1998. Chemoinformatics: What is it and how does it impact drug discovery? Ann. Rep. Med. Chem. 33, 375--384.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brown, N. and Jacoby, E. 2006. On scaffolds and hopping in medicinal chemistry. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 6, 1217--1229.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brown, N. and Lewis, R. A. 2006. Exploiting QSAR methods in lead optimization. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 9, 419--424.Google Scholar
- Brown, N., McKay, B., and Gasteiger, J. 2005. Fingal: A novel approach to geometric fingerprinting and a comparative study of its application to 3D QSAR modelling. QSAR Comb. Sci. 24, 480--484.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brown, N., McKay, B., Gilardoni, F., and Gasteiger, J. 2004. A graph-based genetic algorithm and its application to the multiobjective evolution of median molecules. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44, 1079--1087.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brown, R. D. and Martin, Y. C. 1997. The information content of 2D and 3D structural descriptors relevant to ligand-receptor binding. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 37, 1--9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cechetto, J. D., Elowe, N. H., Blanchard, J. E., and Brown, E. D. 2004. High-throughput screening at McMaster University: Automation in academe. J. Assoc. Lab. Auto. 9, 307--311.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cohen, J. 2004. Bioinformatics—an introduction for computer scientists. ACM Comput. Surv. 36, 122--158. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Coles, S. J., Day, N. E., Murray-Rust, P., Rzepa, H. S., and Zhang, Y. 2005. Enhancement of the chemical semantic web through the use of InChI identifiers. Org. Biomol. Chem. 3, 1832--1834.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Corey, E. J. and Cheng, X.-M. 1995. The Logic of Chemical Synthesis. Wiley, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Cramer, R. D., III., Patterson, D. E., and Bunce, J. D. 1988. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carried proteins. J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 110, 5959--5967.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Crum Brown, A. 1864. On the theory of isomeric compounds. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 23, 707--719.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Crum Brown, A. and Fraser, T. R. 1869. V.—On the connection between chemical constitution and physiological action. Part. I.—On the physiological action of the salts of the ammonium bases, derived from strychnia, brucia, thebaia, codeia, morphia, and nicotia. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 25, 151--203.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diestel, R. 2000. Graph Theory, 2nd Ed. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Dimasi, J. A., Hansen, R. W., and Grabowski, H. G. 2003. The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. J. Health Econ. 22, 151--185.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Durant, J. L., Leland, B. A., Henry, D. R., and Nourse, J. G. 2002. Reoptimization of MDL keys for use in drug discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 42, 1273--1280.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eriksson, L., Arnhold, T., Beck, B., Fox, T., Johansson, E., and Kriegl, J. M. 2004. Onion design and its application to a pharmaceutical QSAR problem. J. Chemomet. 18, 188--202.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eriksson, L., Jaworska, J., Worth, A. P., Cronin, M. T. D., and McDowell, R. M. 2003. Methods for reliability and uncertainty assessment and for applicability evaluations of classification- and regression-based QSARs. Environ. Health Perspect. 111, 1361--1375.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ertl, P. 2007. In silico identification of bioisosteric functional groups. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 10, 281--288.Google Scholar
- Ferrara, P., Priestle, J. P., Vangrevelinghe, E., and Jacoby, E. 2006. New developments and applications of docking and high-throughput docking for drug design and in silico screening. Curr. Comp.-Aided Drug Des. 2, 83--91.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fujita, T., Iwasa, J., and Hansch, C. 1964. A new substituent constant, π, derived from partition coefficients. J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 86, 5175--5180.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gasteiger, J., Ed. 2003. The Handbook of Chemoinformatics. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany.Google Scholar
- Gasteiger, J. and Engel, T., Eds. 2003. Chemoinformatics: A Textbook. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany.Google Scholar
- Gasteiger, J., Pförtner, M., Sitzmann, M., Höllering, R., Sacher, O., Kostka, T., and Karg, N. 2000. Computer-assisted synthesis and reaction planning in combinatorial chemistry. Persp. Drug Discov. Des. 20, 1--21.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gasteiger, J., Rudolph, C., and Sadowski, J. 1990. Automatic generation of 3D atomic coordinates for organic molecules. Tetrahed. Comput. Methodol. 3, 537--547.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ghose, A. K. and Crippen, G. M. 1986. Atomic physicochemical parameters for three-dimensional structure-directed quantitative structure-activity relationships. I. Partition coefficients as a measure of hydrophobicity. J. Comp. Chem. 7, 565--577. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gillet, V. J., Willett, P., Bradshaw, J., and Green, D. V. S. 1999. Selecting combinatorial libraries to optimize diversity and physical properties. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39, 169--177.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Goldberg, K., Newman, M., and Haynsworth, E. 1972. Combinatorial Analysis. In Handbook of Mathematical Functions With Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables, 10th ed. Abramowitz, M., Stegun, I. A. Eds. U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 824--825.Google Scholar
- Gorse, A.-D. 2006. Diversity in medicinal chemistry space. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 6, 3--18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gund, P. 1979. Pharmacophoric pattern searching and receptor mapping. Ann. Rep. Med. Chem. 14, 299--308.Google Scholar
- Güner, O. F. 2005. The impact of pharmacophore modeling in drug design. IDrugs 8, 567--572.Google Scholar
- Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., and Friedman, J. 2001. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Hert, J., Willett, P., Wilton, D. J., Acklin, P., Azzaoui, K., Jacoby, E., and Schuffenhauer, A. 2004. Comparison of fingerprint-based methods for virtual screening using multiple bioactive reference structures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44, 1177--1185.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Johnson, M. A. and Maggiora, G. M. Eds. 1990. Concepts and Applications of Molecular Similarity. Wiley Inter-Science, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Jones, G., Willett, P., Glen, R. C., Leach, A. R., and Taylor, R. 1997. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J. Mol. Biol. 267, 727--748.Google Scholar
- Karelson, M. 2000. Molecular Descriptors in QSAR/QSPR. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany.Google Scholar
- Kitchen, D. B., Decornez, H., Furr, J. R., and Bajorath, J. 2004. Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: Methods and applications. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 935--949.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kuntz, I. D., Blaney, J. M., Oatley, S. J., Langridge, R., and Ferrin, T. E. 1982. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 161, 269--288.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Leach, A. R. 2001. Molecular Modelling: Principles and Applications, 2nd ed. Prentice Hall, Harlow, U.K.Google Scholar
- Leach, A. R. and Gillet, V. J. 2003. An Introduction to Chemoinformatics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lewell, X. Q., Judd, D. B., Watson, S. P., and Hann, M. M. 1998. RECAP—retrosynthetic analysis procedure: A powerful new technique for identifying privileged molecular fragments with useful applications in combinatorial chemistry. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 38, 511--522.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lipinski, C. A., Lombardo, F., Dominy, B. W., and Feeney, P. J. 2001. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 46, 3--26.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Livingstone, D. J. 2000. The characterization of chemical structures using molecular properties. A survey. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 40, 195--209.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lynch, M. F. 2004. Introduction of computers in chemical structure information systems, or what is not recorded in the annals. In The History and Heritage of Scientific and Technological Information Systems: Proceedings of the 2002 Conference, W. B. Rayward and M. E. Bowden, Eds. Information Today, Inc., Medford, NJ, 137--148.Google Scholar
- Markush, E. A. 1924. Pyrazolone dye and process of making the same. U.S. Patent No. 1,506,316, August 26.Google Scholar
- Migliavacca, E. 2003. Applied introduction to multivariate methods used in drug discovery. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 3, 831--843.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Morgan, H. L. 1965. The generation of a unique machine description for chemical structures—a technique developed at chemical abstracts service. J. Chem. Doc. 5, 107--113.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nicolaou, C. A., Brown, N., and Pattichis, C. S. 2007. Molecular optimization using multi-objective methods. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 10, 316--324.Google Scholar
- Oprea, T. Ed. 2005a. Chemoinformatics in Drug Discovery. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany.Google Scholar
- Oprea, T. 2005b. Is safe exchange of data possible? Chem. Eng. News 83, 24--29.Google Scholar
- Pearlman, R. S. 1987. Rapid generation of high quality approximate 3D molecular structures. Chem. Des. Automa. News 2, 5--7.Google Scholar
- Raevsky, O. A. 2004. Physicochemical descriptors in property-based drug design. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 4, 1041--1052.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Reich, H. J. and Cram, D. J. 1969. Macro rings. XXXVII. Multiple electrophilic substitution reactions of {2,2}paracyclophanes and interconversions of polysubstituted derivatives. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 91, 3527--3533.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rogers, D., Brown, R. D., and Hahn, M. 2005. Using extended-connectivity fingerprints with Laplacian-modified Bayesian analysis in high-throughput screening follow-up. J. Biomol. Screen. 10, 682--686.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Russo, E. 2002. Chemistry plans a structural overhaul. Nature Jobs 419, 4--7.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schneider, G. and Fechner, U. 2005. Computer-based de novo design of drug-like molecules. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 4, 649--663.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schuffenhauer, A. and Brown, N. 2006. Chemical diversity and biological activity. Drug Discov. Today: Technol. 3, 387--395.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schuffenhauer, A., Brown, N., Selzer, P., Ertl, P., and Jacoby, E. 2006. Relationships between molecular complexity, biological activity, and structural activity. J. Chem. Inf. Mod. 46, 525--535.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schuffenhauer, A., Floersheim, P., Acklin, P., and Jacoby, E. 2003. Similarity metrics for ligands reflecting the similarity of the target proteins. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43, 391--405.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schuffenhauer, A., Brown, N., Ertl, P., Jenkins, J. L., Selzer, P., and Hamon, J. 2007. Clustering and rule-based classifications of chemical structures evaluated in the biological activity space. J. Chem. Inf. Mod. 47, 325--336.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Snarey, M., Terrett, N. K., Willett, P., and Wilton, D. J. 1997. Comparison of algorithms for dissimilarity-based compound selection. J. Mol. Graph. Mod. 15, 372--385.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Todeschini, R. and Consonni, V. 2000. Handbook of Molecular Descriptors. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany.Google Scholar
- Weininger, D. 1988. Smiles a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to methodology and encoding rules. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 28, 31--36. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Willett, P. 1991. Three-Dimensional Chemical Structure Handling. Research Studies Press, Balclock, Hertfordshine, U.K. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Willett, P. 2000. Textual and chemical information processing: Different domains but similar algorithms. Inform. Res. 5, http://informationr.net/ir/5-2/paper69.html.Google Scholar
- Willett, P., Barnard, J. M., and Downs, G. M. 1998. Chemical similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 38, 983--996.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Chemoinformatics—an introduction for computer scientists
Recommendations
Supercomputer Search for Coagulation Factor XIIa Inhibitors in the Chinese National Compound Library
SupercomputingAbstractA methodology of virtual screening using docking of a large database of organic compounds is presented. The database is the Chinese National Compound Library with over one million low molecular weight organic compounds ready for purchase. In this ...
QSAR, docking studies of 1,3-thiazinan-3-yl isonicotinamide derivatives for antitubercular activity
Display Omitted Design of new chemical entities of 1,3 thiazinan Isoniazid.Combilib and absorption ,distribution, metabolism excretion (ADME) predictions.Docking studies with enoyl ACP reductase. The enzyme enoyl acyl carrier protein reductase (enoyl ...
A structural model for chorismate synthase from Mycobacterium tuberculosis in complex with coenzyme and substrate
The enzymes of the shikimate pathway constitute an excellent target for the design of new antibacterial agents; chorismate synthase (CS) catalyzes the last step of this pathway. The prediction of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) CS three-dimensional ...
Comments