Impact of geometry optimization methods on QSAR modelling: A case study for predicting human serum albumin binding affinity

References

• A. Cherkasov, E.N. Muratov, D. Fourches, A. Varnek, I.I. Baskin, M. Cronin, J. Dearden, P. Gramatica, Y.C. Martin, R. Todeschini, V. Consonni, V.E. Kuz’min, R. Cramer, R. Benigni, C. Yang, J. Rathman, L. Terfloth, J. Gasteiger, A. Richard, and A. Tropsha, QSAR modeling: Where have you been? Where are you going to? J. Med. Chem. 57 (2014), pp. 4977–5010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Todeschini and V. Consonni, Molecular Descriptors for Chemoinformatics, Vol. 1&2, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• G. Schüürmann, Quantum chemical descriptors in structure-activity relationships - calculation interpretation and comparison of methods, in Predicting Chemical Toxicity and Fate, M.T.D. Cronin and D.J. Livingstone, eds., CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2004, pp. 85–149.
   Google Scholar
• S.J. Enoch, The use of quantum mechanics derived descriptors in computational toxicology, in Recent Advances in QSAR Studies. Methods and Applications, T. Puzyn, J. Leszczynski, and M.T.D. Cronin, eds., Springer, New York, 2010, pp. 13–28.
   Google Scholar
• H.B. Schlegel, Geometry optimization, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 1 (2011), pp. 790–809.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.J.P. Stewart, Optimization of parameters for semiempirical methods V: Modification of NDDO approximations and application to 70 elements, J. Mol. Model. 13 (2007), pp. 1173–1213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• F.A. Pasha, H.K. Srivastava, and P.P. Singh, Comparative QSAR study of phenol derivatives with the help of density functional theory, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 13 (2005), pp. 6823–6829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Eroglu, S. Palaz, O. Oltulu, H. Turkmen, and C. Ozaydın, Comparative QSTR study using semi-empirical and first principle methods based descriptors for acute toxicity of diverse organic compounds to the fathead minnow, Int. J. Mol. Sci. 8 (2007), pp. 1265–1283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reenu and Vikas, Exploring the role of quantum chemical descriptors in modeling acute toxicity of diverse chemicals to Daphnia magna, J. Mol. Graph. Model. 61 (2015), pp. 89–101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DRAGON for Windows 6. Talete srl, Milan, Italy, 2013; software available at https://www.talete.mi.it/.
   Google Scholar
• T. Puzyn, N. Suzuki, M. Haranczyk, and J. Rak, Calculation of quantum-mechanical descriptors for QSPR at the DFT level: Is it necessary? J. Chem. Inf. Model. 48 (2008), pp. 1174–1180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Å. Rinnan, N.J. Christensen, and S.B. Engelsen, How the energy evaluation method used in the geometry optimization step affect the quality of the subsequent QSAR/QSPR models, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 24 (2010), pp. 17–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A.D. Becke, Density-functional thermochemistry. III. The role of exact exchange, J. Chem. Phys. 98 (1993), pp. 5648–5652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Lee, W. Yang, and R.G. Parr, Development of the Colle-Salvetti correlation-energy formula into a functional of the electron density, Phys. Rev. B. 37 (1988), pp. 785–789.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A.H. Pandith and N. Islam, Comparative assessment of QSTR models based on density functional, Hartree-Fock, AM1, and PM3 methods for acute toxicity of aliphatic compounds toward Vibrio fischeri, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 113 (2013), pp. 830–839.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Rybinska, A. Sosnowska, M. Barycki, and T. Puzyn, Geometry optimization method versus predictive ability in QSPR modeling for ionic liquids, J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 30 (2016), pp. 165–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Fasano, S. Curry, E. Terreno, M. Galliano, G. Fanali, P. Narciso, S. Notari, and P. Ascenzi, The extraordinary ligand binding properties of human serum albumin, Life. 57 (2005), pp. 787–796.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Guidance document on the validation of (quantitative) structure-activity relationships [(Q)SAR] models. Series on testing and assessment no. 69, OECD Environment Health and Safety Publications, Paris, France, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• G. Colmenarejo, A. Alvarez-Pedraglio, and J.L. Lavandera, Cheminformatic models to predict binding affinities to human serum albumin, J. Med. Chem. 44 (2001), pp. 4370–4378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SPARTAN 10. Wavefunction Inc., Irvine, USA, 2010; software available at https://wavefun.com.
   Google Scholar
• G.A. Petersson, A. Bennett, T.G. Tensfeldt, M.A. Al-Laham, W.A. Shirley, and J. Mantzaris, A complete basis set model chemistry. I. The total energies of closed-shell atoms and hydrides of the first-row atoms, J. Chem. Phys. 89 (1988), pp. 2193–2218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D.N. Joanes and C.A. Gill, Comparing measures of sample skewness and kurtosis. Statistician 47 (1998), pp. 183–189.
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team, R: A language and environment for statistical computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2012; software available at https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• P. Gramatica, N. Chirico, E. Papa, S. Cassani, and S. Kovarich, QSARINS: A new software for the development, analysis, and validation of QSAR MLR models, J. Comput. Chem. 34 (2013), pp. 2121–2132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Gramatica, S. Cassani, and N. Chirico, QSARINS-Chem: Insubria data sets and new QSAR/QSPR models for environmental pollutants in QSARINS, J. Comput. Chem. 35 (2014), pp. 1036–1044.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Golbraikh and A. Tropsha, Beware of q2!, J. Mol. Graph. Model. 20 (2002), pp. 269–276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. Chirico and P. Gramatica, Real external predictivity of QSAR models: How to evaluate it? Comparison of different validation criteria and proposal of using the concordance correlation coefficient, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 51 (2011), pp. 2320–2335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.K. Ojha, I. Mitra, R.N. Das, and K. Roy, Further exploring r2m metrics for validation of QSPR models, Chemom. Int. Lab. Syst. 107 (2011), pp. 194–205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Roy, R.N. Das, P. Ambure, and R.B. Aher, Be aware of error measures. Further studies on validation of predictive QSAR models, Chemom. Int. Lab. Syst. 152 (2016), pp. 18–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Gramatica and A. Sangion, A historical excursus on the statistical validation parameters for QSAR models: A clarification concerning metrics and terminology, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 56 (2016), pp. 1127–1131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Roy, S. Kar, and P. Ambure, On a simple approach for determining applicability domain of QSAR models, Chemom. Int. Lab. Syst. 145 (2015), pp. 22–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O. Devinyak, D. Havrylyuk, and R. Lesyk, 3D-MoRSE descriptors explained, J. Mol. Graph. Model. 54 (2014), pp. 194–203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L.M. Hall, L.H. Hall, and L.B. Kier, Modeling drug albumin binding affinity with E-state topological structure representation, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43 (2003), pp. 2120–2128.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• J. Cartmell, S. Enoch, D. Krstajic, and D.E. Leahy, Automated QSPR through competitive workflow, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 19 (2005), pp. 821–833.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Estrada, E. Uriarte, E. Molina, Y. Simón-Manso, and G.W.A. Milne, An integrated in silico analysis of drug-binding to human serum albumin, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 46 (2006), pp. 2709–2724.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.B. Gunturi, R. Narayanan, and A. Khandelwal, In silico ADME modelling 2: Computational models to predict human serum albumin binding affinity using ant colony systems, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 14 (2006), pp. 4118–4129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O. Deeb and B. Hemmateenejad, ANN-QSAR model of drug-binding to human serum albumin, Chem. Biol. Drug Des. 70 (2007), pp. 19–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Chen and X. Chen, Results of molecular docking as descriptors to predict human serum albumin binding affinity, J. Mol. Graph. Model. 33 (2012), pp. 35–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Lambrinidis, T. Vallianatou, and A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, In vitro, in silico and integrated strategies for the estimation of plasma protein binding. A review, Adv. Drug. Deliv. Rev. 86 (2015), pp. 27–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Liu, X. Yang, and R. Lu, Development of classification model and QSAR model for predicting binding affinity of endocrine disrupting chemicals to human sex hormone-binding globulin, Chemosphere. 156 (2016), pp. 1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• X. Wu, Q. Zhang, and J. Hu, QSAR study of the acute toxicity to fathead minnow based on a large dataset, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 27 (2016), pp. 147–164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Schneider, W. Neidhart, T. Giller, and G. Schmid, "Scaffold-Hopping" by topological pharmacophore search: A contribution to virtual screening, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed Engl. 38 (1999), pp. 2894–2896.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Gramatica, Principles of QSAR models validation: Internal and external, QSAR Comb. Sci. 26 (2007), pp. 694–701.
   Google Scholar
• V. Ruusmann, S. Sild, and U. Maran, QSAR DataBank repository: Open and linked qualitative and quantitative structure-activity relationship models, J. Cheminf. 7 (2015), p. 32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values, William Morrow and Company, New York City, 1974.
   Google Scholar