MMSL 2016, 85(2):75-79 | DOI: 10.31482/mmsl.2016.014

VIRTUAL SCREENING IN DRUG DESIGN - OVERVIEW OF MOST FREQUENT TECHNIQUESReview article

Tomáš Kučera ORCID...*
Department of Toxicology and Military Pharmacy, Faculty of Military Health Sciences, University of Defence, Trebesska 1575, 500 01 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic

New and modern techniques of drug design are extensively used in parallel or instead of the classic ones. Applicability of virtual screening (VS) is growing with the computational performance. This article includes list and short description of most frequent used methods in VS. These methods are divided into two groups - ligand-based VS and structure-based VS. Ligand based methods include chemical similarity, pharmacophore and quantitative structure-activity relationship. Molecular docking and scoring are methods of the structure-based VS.

Keywords: virtual screening, drug design, docking, scoring, pharmacophore, fingerprint, QSAR

Received: May 22, 2016; Revised: June 5, 2016; Published: June 14, 2016  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Kučera, T. (2016). VIRTUAL SCREENING IN DRUG DESIGN - OVERVIEW OF MOST FREQUENT TECHNIQUES. MMSL, 85(2), 75-79. doi: 10.31482/mmsl.2016.014
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Klebe, G. Drug design. Springer, New York 2013. 850 p. Go to original source...
    2. Stahura, F.; Bajorath, J. New Methodologies for Ligand-Based Virtual Screening. Curr Pharm Des. 2005, 11, 1189-1202. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    3. Sliwoski, G.; Kothiwale, S.; Meiler, J.; Lowe, E. W. Computational Methods in Drug Discovery. Pharmacol Rev. 2013, 66, 334-395. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    4. Kuchař, M. Výzkum a vývoj léčiv: studijní program: syntéza a výroba léčiv. VŠCHT, Praha 2008. 166 p.
    5. Höltje H. D. Molecular modeling: basic principles and applications. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim 2003. 228 p.
    6. Sousa, S. F.; Ribeiro, A. J. M.; Coimbra, J. T. S.; Neves, R. P. P.; Martins, S. A.; Moorthy, N. S. H. N. et al. Protein-Ligand Docking in the New Millennium - A Retrospective of 10 Years in the Field. Curr Med Chem. 2013, 20, 2296-2314. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    7. Moustakas, D. T.; Lang, P. T.; Pegg, S.; Pettersen, E.; Kuntz, I. D.; Brooijmans, N. et al. Development and validation of a modular, extensible docking program: DOCK 5. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2006, 20, 601-619. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    8. Lipkowitz, K. B.; Boyd, D. B. Reviews in computational chemistry. [online]. Wiley-vch, New York, 2001 [cit. 2016-05-12]. Available from: http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=468828 Go to original source...
    9. Fischer, D. A geometry-based suite of molecular docking processes. J Mol Biol. 1995, 248, 459-477. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. Goodsell, D. S.; Olson, A. J. Automated docking of substrates to proteins by simulated annealing. Proteins Struct Funct Genet. 1990, 8, 195-202. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Grinter, S.; Zou, X. Challenges, Applications, and Recent Advances of Protein-Ligand Docking in Structure-Based Drug Design. Molecules. 2014, 19, 10150-10176. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Halgren, T. A. Merck molecular force field. I. Basis, form, scope, parameterization, and performance of MMFF94. J Comput Chem. 1996, 17, 490-519. Go to original source...
    13. Eldridge, M. D.; Murray, C. W.; Auton, T. R.; Paolini, G. V.; Mee, R. P. Empirical scoring functions. 1. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 1997, 11, 425-445. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    14. Muegge, I.; Martin, Y. C. A General and Fast Scoring Function for Protein-Ligand Interactions: A Simplified Potential Approach. J Med Chem. 1999, 42, 791-804. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    15. Charifson, P. S.; Corkery, J. J.; Murcko, M. A.; Walters, W. P. Consensus Scoring: A Method for Obtaining Improved Hit Rates from Docking Databases of Three-Dimensional Structures into Proteins. J Med Chem. 1999, 42, 5100-5109. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    16. Cerqueira, N. M. F. S. A.; Gesto, D.; Oliveira, E. F.; Santos-Martins, D.; Brás, N. F.; Sousa, S. F.; Fernandes, P. A.; Ramos, M. J. Receptor-based virtual screening protocol for drug discovery. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics. 2015, 582, 56-67. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    17. Ferreira, L. G.; dos Santos, R. N.; Oliva, G.; Andricopulo A. D. Molecular Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design Strategies. Molecules. 2015, 20, 13384-13421. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    18. Patterson, D. E.; Cramer, R. D.; Ferguson, A. M.; Clark, R. D.; Weinberger, L. E. Neighborhood Behavior: A Useful Concept for Validation of "Molecular Diversity" Descriptors. J Med Chem. 1996, 39, 3049-3059. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    19. Sheridan, R. Why do we need so many chemical similarity search methods? Drug Discov Today. 2002, 7, 903-911. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    20. Xue, L.; Godden, J. W.; Bajorath, J. Database Searching for Compounds with Similar Biological Activity Using Short Binary Bit String Representations of Molecules. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 1999, 39, 881-886. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    21. Willett, P. Similarity-based virtual screening using 2D fingerprints. Drug Discov Today. 2006, 11, 1046-1053. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    22. Vogt, M.; Bajorath, J. Chemoinformatics: A view of the field and current trends in method development. Bioorg Med Chem. 2012, 20, 5317-5323. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    23. Wermuth, C. G.; Ganellin, C. R.; Lindberg, P.; Mitscher, L. A. Glossary of terms used in medicinal chemistry (IUPAC Recommendations 1998). Pure Appl Chem [online]. 1998, 70. [cit 2016-05-13]. Available from: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/pac.1998.70.issue-5/pac199870051129/pac199870051129.xml Go to original source...
    24. Hung, C. L., Chen, C. C. Computational Approaches for Drug Discovery: Computational Approaches for Drug Discovery. Drug Dev Res. 2014, 75, 412-418. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    25. Verma, J.; Khedkar, V.; Coutinho, E. 3D-QSAR in Drug Design - A Review. Curr Top Med Chem. 2010, 10, 95-115. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    26. Kubinyi, H. QSAR and 3D QSAR in drug design Part 1: methodology. Drug Discov Today. 1997, 2, 457-467. Go to original source...
    27. Damale, M.; Harke, S.; Kalam, K. F.; Shinde, D.; Sangshetti, J. Recent Advances in Multidimensional QSAR (4D-6D): A Critical Review. Mini-Rev Med Chem. 2014, 14, 35-55. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    28. Tropsha, A. Best Practices for QSAR Model Development, Validation, and Exploitation. Mol Inform. 2010, 29, 476-488. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

    Return to the content