Genetic diversity: applications of evolutionary algorithms to combinatorial library design

Bibliography

• GALLOP MA, BARRETT RW, DOWER WJ et al. Applications of combinatorial technologies to drug discovery. 1. Background and peptide combinatorial libraries. J. Med. Chem. (1994) 37:1233–1251.
   Google Scholar
• GORDON EM, BARRETT RW, DOWER WJ et al: Applications of combinatorial technologies to drug discovery. 2.Combinatorial organic synthesis, library screening strategies, and future directions. J. Med. Chem. (1994) 37:1385–1401.
   Google Scholar
• TERRETT NK, GARDNER M, GORDON DW et al: Combi-natorial synthesis - the design of compound libraries and their application to drug discovery. Tetrahedron (1995) 51:8135–8173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• THOMPSON LA, ELLMAN JA: Synthesis and applications of small molecule libraries. Chem. Rev. (1996) 96:555–600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GORDON EM, GALLOP MA, PATEL DV: Strategy and tac-tics in combinatorial organic synthesis. Applications to drug discovery. Acc. Chem. Res. (1996) 29:144–154.
   Google Scholar
• BALKENHOHL F, VON DEM BUSSCHE-HUENNEFELD C,LANSKY A et al: Combinatorial synthesis of small or-ganic molecules. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. (1996) 35:2288–2337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BLANEY JM, MARTIN EJ: Computational approaches for combinatorial library design and molecular diversity analysis. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. (1997) 1:54–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WILLETT P: Computational tools for the analysis of mo-lecular diversity. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. (1997) 7/8:1–11.
   Google Scholar
• •Good overview of computational approaches to library de-sign and diversity analysis.
   Google Scholar
• BURES MG, MARTIN YC: Computational methods in molecular diversity and combinatorial chemistry. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. (1998) 2:376–380.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •Recent update of progress in the field.
   Google Scholar
• BROWN RD: Descriptors for diversity analysis. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. (1997) 7/8:31–49.
   Google Scholar
• •Review of 2D, 3D and physical property-based descriptors.
   Google Scholar
• MDL INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC.: SSKEYS Gateway. 14600 Catalina St., San Leandro, CA 94577, USA.
   Google Scholar
• TRIPOS, INC.: Unity Chemical Information Software,version 2.5. 1699 S Hanley Road, Suite 303, St Louis, MO 63144, USA.
   Google Scholar
• DAYLIGHT CHEMICAL INFORMATION, INC.: Daylight Chemical Information Software, version 4.51. 27401 Los Altos, Suite #370, Mission Viejo, CA 92691, USA.
   Google Scholar
• BARNARD CHEMICAL INFORMATION LTD.: Fingerprint Generation Package. 46 Uppergate Road, Sheffield S6 6BX, UK.
   Google Scholar
• DOWNS GM, WILLETT P: The use of similarity and clus-tering techniques for the prediction of molecular properties. In: Applied Multivariate Analysis in SAR and Environmental Studies. Devillers J, Karcher W (Eds.), ECSC, EEC, EAEC, Brussels and Luxembourg (1990:247–279.
   Google Scholar
• CHENG C, MAGGIORA G, LAJINESS M et al: Four associa-tion coefficients for relating molecular similarity measures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. ScL (1996) 36:909–915.
   Google Scholar
• FLOWER DR On the properties of bit string-based measures of chemical similarity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1998) 38:379–386.
   Google Scholar
• •Interesting critique of popular 2D bitstring descriptors.
   Google Scholar
• KEARSLEY SK, SALLAMACK S, FLUDER EM eta].: Chemical similarity using physiochemical property descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1996) 36:118–127.
   Google Scholar
• MARTIN EJ, BLANEY JM, SIANI MA et al: Measuring diver-sity: experimental design of combinatorial libraries for drug discovery. J. Med. Chem. (1995) 38:1431–1436.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BROWN RD, MARTIN YC: Use of structure-activity data to compare structure-based clustering methods and descriptors for use in compound selection. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1996) 36:572–584.
   Google Scholar
• •In-depth study seeking to validate diversity descriptors.
   Google Scholar
• PICKETT SD, MASON JS, MCLAY IM: Diversity profiling and design using 3D pharmacophores: pharmacophore-derived queries (PDQ). J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1996) 36:1214–1223.
   Google Scholar
• DAVIES K: Using pharmacophore diversity to select molecules to test from commercial catalogues. In: Mo-lecular Diversity, and Combinatorial Chemistry: Libraries and Drug Discovery. Chaiken IM, Janda KD (Eds.), ACS, Washington DC (1996):309–316.
   Google Scholar
• PEARLMAN RS, SMITH KM: Novel software tools forchemical diversity. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. (1998) 9/10/11:339–353.
   Google Scholar
• HALL LH, KIER LB: The molecular connectivity chi in-dexes and kappa shape indexes in structure-property modelling. In: Reviews in Computational Chemistry. Lip-kowitz KB, Boyd DB (Eds.), (1991) 2:367–422.
   Google Scholar
• CUMMINS DJ, ANDREWS CW, BENTLEY JA et al.: Molecu-lar diversity in chemical databases: comparison of me-dicinal chemistry knowledge bases and databases of commercially available compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Com-put. Sci. (1996) 36:750–763.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• HASSAN M, BIELAWSKI JP, HEMPEL JC et al.: Optimisa-tion and visualisation of molecular diversity of combi-natorial libraries. Mol Diversity (1996) 2:64–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HALL LH, KIER LB, BROWN, BB: Molecular similarity based on novel atom-type electrotopological indices. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1995) 35:1074–1080.
   Google Scholar
• Molecular Simulations, Inc.: Cerius2 version 3.8 Drug Dis-covery Work Bench. 9685 Scranton Road, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.
   Google Scholar
• MARTIN YC, BURES MG, DANAHER EA eta].: A fast new approach to pharmacophore mapping and its applica-tion to dopaminergic and benzodiazepine agonists. J. Comput-Aid. Mol Des. (1993) 7:83–102
   Google Scholar
• DOWNS GM, WILLETT P, FISANICK W: Similarity search-ing and clustering of chemical structure databases us-ing molecular property data. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1994) 34:1094–1102.
   Google Scholar
• HUDSON BD, HYDE RM, RAHR E et al: Parameter basedmethods for compound selection from chemical data bases. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. (1996) 15:285–289.
   Google Scholar
• PATTERSON DE, CRAMER RD, FERGUSON AM et al.: Neighbourhood behaviour: a useful concept for vali-dation of molecular diversity descriptors. J. Med. Chem. (1996) 39:3049–3059.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EVERITT BS, DUNN G: Applied Multivariate Data Analysis. Oxford University Press, New York (1992).
   Google Scholar
• DILLON WS, GOLDSTEIN M: Multivariate Analysis - Meth-ods and Applications. John Wiley, New York (1984).
   Google Scholar
• DiverseSolutions v3.01. Distributed by Tripos, Inc. on be-half of the Laboratory for Molecular Graphics and Theoreti-cal Modeling, College of Pharmacy; University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Chemical Design Ltd.: ChemDiverse, Roundway House,Cromwell Park, Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire, 0X7 55R, UK.
   Google Scholar
• •Chemical Design Ltd. has recently been acquired by Oxford Molecular.
   Google Scholar
• MASON JS, PICKETT SD: Partition-based selection. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. (1997) 7/8:85–114.
   Google Scholar
• •Thorough review of partition-based selection methods.
   Google Scholar
• DUNBAR JB: Cluster-based selection. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. (1997) 7/8:51–63.
   Google Scholar
• •Overview of clustering methods as applied to library design and diversity analysis.
   Google Scholar
• BARNARD JM, DOWNS GM: Clustering of chemical structures on the basis of two-dimensional similarity measures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1992) 32:644–649.
   Google Scholar
• LAJINESS MS: Dissimilarity-based compound selection techniques. Perspect. Drug Discov. Des. (1997) 7/8:65–74.
   Google Scholar
• •Good review of dissimilarity selection methods.
   Google Scholar
• HOLLIDAY JD, RANADE SS, WILLETT P: A fast algorithm for selecting sets of dissimilar molecules from large chemical databases. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. (1995) 14:501–506.
   Google Scholar
• CLARK RD: OptiSim: an extended dissimilarity selec-tion method for finding diverse representative sub-sets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1997) 37:1181–1188.
   Google Scholar
• BAECK T, HAMMEL U, SCHVVEFEL H-P: Evolutionary computation: comments on the history and current state. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. (1997) 1:3–17.
   Google Scholar
• •Excellent survey of state-of-the-art in evolutionary algorithm research.
   Google Scholar
• GOLDBERG DE: Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, USA (1989).
   Google Scholar
• •Standard, if slightly dated, textbook on genetic algorithms.
   Google Scholar
• FOGEL DB: Evolutionary Computation: Toward a New Phi-losophy of Machine Intelligence. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA (1995).
   Google Scholar
• Handbook of Evolutionary Computation. Baeck T, Fogel DB, Michalewicz Z (Eds.), Oxford University Press/Institute of Physics, New York, USA (1997).
   Google Scholar
• •A comprehensive work for those seeking detailed informa-tion on evolutionary algorithms.
   Google Scholar
• MILNE GWA: Mathematics as a basis for chemistry. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1997) 37:639–644.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• CLARK DE, WESTHEAD DR: A review of evolutionary algorithms in computer-aided molecular design. J. Com-put.-Aided Mol. Des. (1996) 10:337–358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •Comprehensive review of applications of evolutionary algo-rithms in CAMD. Now slightly dated.
   Google Scholar
• DEVILLERS J: Genetic algorithms in computer-aided molecular design. In: Genetic Algorithms in Molecular Modelling Devillers J (Ed.), Academic Press, London, UK (1996):1–34.
   Google Scholar
• PARRILL A: Evolutionary and genetic methods in drug design. Drug Discov. Today (1997) 1:514–521.
   Google Scholar
• MADDALENA DJ, SNOWDON GM: Applications of ge-netic algorithms to drug design. Exp. Opin. Ther. Patents (1997) 7:247–254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CLARK DE: Evolutionary algorithms in rational drug design: a review of current applications and a look to the future. In: Proceedings of the New Methods in Rational Drug Design Symposium. Parrill A, Reddy R (Eds.), 214th ACS Meeting, 7–11 September 1997, Las Vegas (Nevada), USA. (In Press).
   Google Scholar
• SHERIDAN RP, KEARSLEY SK: Using a genetic algorithm to suggest combinatorial libraries. J. Chem. Inf Comput. Sci. (1995) 35:310–320.
   Google Scholar
• •First published application of GAs to library design.
   Google Scholar
• CHO SJ, ZHENG W, TROPSHA A: Rational combinatorial library design. 2. Rational design of targeted combina-torial peptide libraries using chemical similarity probe and the inverse QSAR approaches. J. Chem. Inf Comput. Sci. (1998) 38:259–268.
   Google Scholar
• SINGH J, ATOR MA, JAEGER EP et al.: Application of ge-netic algorithms to combinatorial synthesis: a compu-tational approach to lead identification and lead optimisation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. (1996) 118:1669–1676.
   Google Scholar
• ••Use of biological activity as a GA fitness function.
   Google Scholar
• WEBER L, WALLBAUM S, BROGER C et al.: Optimisation of the biological activity of combinatorial compound libraries by a genetic algorithm. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. (1995) 34:2280–2282.
   Google Scholar
• ••Use of biological activity as a GA fitness function.
   Google Scholar
• YOKOBAYASHI Y, IKEBUKURO I, MCNIVEN S et al.: Di-rected evolution of trypsin inhibiting peptides using a genetic algorithm. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 (1996) 1:2435-2439.
   Google Scholar
• CLARK DE, MURRAY CW, LI J: Current issues in de novomolecular design. In: Reviews in Computational Chemis-try. Lipkowitz KB, Boyd DB (Eds.), (1997) 11:67–125.
   Google Scholar
• KICK EK, ROE DC, SKILLMAN AG et al.: Structure-based design and combinatorial chemistry yield low-nanomolar inhibitors of cathepsin D. Chem. Biol. (1997) 4:297–307.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ••Striking example of the power of combining structural infor-mation with molecular diversity design
   Google Scholar
• LI J, MURRAY CW, WASZKOWYCZ B et al.: Targeted molecular diversity in drug discovery: integration of structure-based design and combinatorial chemistry. Drug Discov. Today (1998) 3:105–112.
   Google Scholar
• •Review of progress in structure-based library design.
   Google Scholar
• MARTIN EJ, SPELLMEYER DC, CRITCHLOW RE et al: Doescombinatorial chemistry obviate computer-aided drug design? In: Reviews in Computational Chemistry. Lipkowitz KB, Boyd DB (Eds.), (1997) 10:75–100.
   Google Scholar
• ANTEL J, REUTER I, SCHOMBURG D: On the benefits ofattractive pseudo-potentials in a genetic algorithm for structure-based library screening. In: Computer-Assisted Lead Finding and Optimization: Current Tools for Medici-nal Chemistry. Van De Waterbeemd H, Testa B, Folkers G (Eds.) Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany (1997):181–188.
   Google Scholar
• JONES G, WILLETT P, GLEN RC et al: Further developentof a genetic algorithm for ligand docking and its appli-cation to screening combinatorial libraries. In: Pro-ceedings of the New Methods in Rational Drug Design Symposium. Parrill A, Reddy R (Eds.), 214th ACS Meeting, 7–11 September 1997, Las Vegas (Nevada), USA. (In Press).
   Google Scholar
• LIU D, JIANG H, CHEN K et al.: A new approach to de-signing virtual combinatorial library with genetic al-gorithm based on 3D grid property. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1998) 38:233–242.
   Google Scholar
• BROWN RD, MARTIN YC: Designing combinatorial li-brary mixtures using a genetic algorithm. J. Med. Chem. (1997) 40:2304–2313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •Shows how GA can simultaneously optimise several proper-ties of importance in library design.
   Google Scholar
• GILLET VJ, WILLETT P, BRADSHAW J: The effectiveness of reactant pools for generating structurally-diverse combinatorial libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1997) 37:731–740.
   Google Scholar
• •Paper illustrating the benefits of product-based reagent selection.
   Google Scholar
• LIPINSKI CA, LOMBARDO F, DOMINY BW et al.: Experi-mental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and de-velopment settings. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. (1997) 23:3–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GILLET VJ, WILLETT P, BRADSHAW J: Identification ofbiological activity profiles using substructural analysis and genetic algorithms. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1998) 38:165–179.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• LEWIS RA, GOOD AC, PICKETT SD: Quantification ofmolecular similarity and its application to combinato-rial chemistry. In: Computer-Assisted Lead Finding and Optimization: Current Tools for Medicinal Chemistry. Van De Waterbeemd H, Testa B, Folkers G (Eds.), Wiley-VCH, Weinheim (1997):135–156.
   Google Scholar
• GOOD AC, LEWIS RA: New methodology for profilingcombinatorial libraries and screening sets: cleaning up the design process with HARPick. J. Med. Chem. (1997) 40:3926–3936.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• AGRAFIOTIS DK: Stochastic algorithms for maximizingmolecular diversity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (1997) 37:841–851.
   Google Scholar
• SALEMME FR, SPURLINO J, BONE R: Serendipity meetsprecision: the integration of structure-based drug de-sign and combinatorial chemistry for efficient drug discovery. Structure (1997) 5:319–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WEBER L: Applications of genetic algorithms in mo-lecular diversity. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. (1998) 2:381–385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WEBER L: Evolutionary combinatorial chemistry: ap-plication of genetic algorithms. Drug Disc. Today (1998) 3:379–385.
   Google Scholar