Leadhopping – and beyond

Bibliography

• CRAMER RD, POSS MA, HERMSMEIER MA, CAULFIELD TJ, KOWALA MC, VALENTINE MT: Prospective identification of biologically active structures by topomer shape similarity searching. J. Med. Chem. (1999) 42:3919-3933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CRAMER RD, JILEK RJ, GUESSREGEN S, CLARK SJ, WENDT B, CLARK RD: ‘Lead-Hopping’. Validation of topomer similarity as a superior predictor of similar biological activities. J. Med. Chem. (2004), 47:6777-6791.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
  ••The majority of leadhopping successes; leading topomer reference.
   Google Scholar
• RUSH TR, GRANT JA, MOSYAK L, NICHOLLS A: A shape-based 3-d scaffold hopping method and its application to a bacterial protein-protein interaction. J. Med. Chem. (2005) 48:1489-1495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
  •Leadhopping success; leading ROCS reference.
   Google Scholar
• MUCHMORE SW, SOUERS AJ, AKRITOPOULOU-ZANZE I: The use of three dimensional shape and electrostatic similarity searching in the identification of a melanin-concentrating hormone receptor 1 antagonist. Chem. Biol. Drug Disc. (2006) 67:174-176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LOW CMR, BUCK IM, COOKE T, CUSHNIR JR, KALINDJIAN SB, KOTECHA A, SHANKLEY NP, VINTER JG, WRIGHT L: Scaffold hopping with molecular field points: identification of a cholecystokinin-2 receptor pharmacophore and its use in the design of a prototypical series of pyrrole- and imidazole-based CCK2 antagonists. J. Med. Chem. (2005), 48:6790-6802.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PERKINS E, SUN D, NGUYEN A et al.: Novel inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase/PARP1 and PARP2 identified using a cell-based screen in yeast. Cancer Res. (2001) 61:4175-4183.
   Google Scholar
• CRAMER RD: Topomer CoMFA: a design methodology for rapid lead optimization. J. Med. Chem. (2003) 46:374-389.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ANDREWS KM, CRAMER RD: Toward general methods of targeted library design: topomer shape similarity searching with diverse structures as queries. J. Med. Chem. (2000) 43:1723-1740.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
  •Results from leadhopping in large chemical spaces.
   Google Scholar
• CRAMER RD, SOLTANSHAHI F, JILEK R, CAMPBELL B: Generating and searching ∼ 10E20 synthetically accessible structures. Abs ACS (2006), 231st mtg: CINF 38.
   Google Scholar
• CLEVES AE, JAIN AN: robust ligand-based modeling of the biological targets of known drugs. J. Med. Chem. (2006) 49:2921-2938.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
  •Possible basis for predicting off-target effects in humans.
   Google Scholar
• JENKINS JL, GLICK M, DAVIES JW: A 3D similarity method for scaffold hopping from known drugs or natural ligands to new chemotypes. J. Med. Chem. (2004) 49:6144-6159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZHANG Q, MUEGGE I: Scaffold hopping through virtual screening using 2d and 3D similarity descriptors: ranking, voting, and consensus scoring. J. Med. Chem. (2006) 49:1536-1548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GOOD AC, CHO SJ, MASON JS: Descriptors you can count on? Normalized and filtered pharmacophore descriptors for virtual screening. J. Comp.-Aided Mol. Des. (2004) 18:523-527.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LENGAUER T, LEMMEN C, RAREY M, ZIMMERMAN S: Novel technologies for virtual screening. Drug Discov. Today (2004) 9:27-34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CRAMER RD, REDL G, BERKOFF CE: Substructural Analysis: A novel approach to the problem of drug design. J. Med. Chem. (1974) 17:533-535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WILLETT P, WINTERMAN VA: A comparison of some measures of intermolecular structural similarity. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. (1986) 5:18-25.
   Google Scholar
• STIEFL N, WATSON IA, BAUMANN K, ZALIANI A: ErG: 2D pharmacophore descriptions for scaffold hopping. J. Chem. Inf. Model. (2006) 46:208-220.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BARKER EJ, BUTTAR D, COSGROVE DA et al.: Scaffold hopping using clique detection applied to reduced graphs. J. Chem. Inf. Model. (2006) 46:503-511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WOLOHAN PRN, AKELLA LB, DORFMAN RJ, NELL PG, MUNDT SM, CLARK RD: Structural unity analysis identifies lead series and facilitates scaffold hopping in combinatorial chemistry. J. Chem. Inf. Model. (2006) 46:1188-1193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BENDER A, MUSSA HY, GILL GS, GLEN RC: Molecular surface point environments for virtual screening and the elucidation of binding patterns (MOLPRINT-3D). J. Med. Chem. (2004) 47:6569-6583.
   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
• SCHNEIDER G, NEIDHART W, GILLER T, SCHMID G: ‘Scaffold-hopping’ by topological pharmacophore search: a contribution to virtual screening. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. (1999) 38:2894-2896.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NAERUM L, NORSKOV-LAURITSEN L, OLESEN PH: Scaffold hopping and optimization towards libraries of glycogen synthase kinase-3 inhibitors. Biorg. Med. Chem. Lett. (2002) 12:1525-1528.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RENNER S, NOESKE T, PARSONS CG, SCHNEIDER P, WEIL T, SCHNEIDER G: New allosteric modulators of metabotropic glutamate receptor-5 (mglur5) found by ligand-based virtual screening. Chembiochem (2005) 6:620-625.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HOLLIDAY JD, SALIM H, WHITTLE M, WILLETT P: Analysis and display of the size dependence of chemical similarity coefficients. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (2003) 43:819-828.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• WARREN GL, ANDREWS CW, CAPELLI AM et al.: A critical assessment of docking programmes and scoring functions. J. Med. Chem. (2006) (In Press).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CUMMINGS MD, DESJARLAIS RL, GIBBS AC, MOHAN V, JAEGER EP: Comparison of automated docking programmes as screening tools. J. Med. Chem. (2005) 48:962-976.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PHAM TA, JAIN AN: Parameter Estimation for scoring protein-ligand interactions using negative training data. J. Med. Chem. (2006) (In Press).
   Google Scholar
• MITEVA MA, LEE WH, MONTES MO, VILLOUTRIX BO: Fast structure-based virtual ligand screening combining FRED, DOCK, and Surflex. J. Med. Chem. (2005) 48:6012-6022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CHEN H, LYNE PD, GIORDANETTO FJ: On evaluating molecular-docking methods for pose prediction and enrichment factors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. (2006):401.
   Google Scholar
• EVERS A, HESSLER G, MATTER H, KLABUNDE T: Virtual screening of biogenic amine-binding g protein coupled receptors: comparative evaluation of protein- and ligand-based virtual screening protocols. J. Med. Chem. (2005) 48:5448-5465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HAWKINS PCD: A comparison of structure-based and shape-based tools for virtual screening. Abs ACS (2006) 231st mtg: COMP 79.
   Google Scholar
• CRAMER RD, JILEK RJ, ANDREWS KM: dbtop: topomer similarity searching of conventional databases. J. Mol. Graph. Modeling (2002) 20:447-462.
   Google Scholar
• JAIN AN: Ligand-based structural hypotheses for virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. (2004) 47:947-961.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MASEK BB, MERCHANT A, MATTHEW JB: Molecular shape comparison of angiotensin II receptor antagonists. J. Med. Chem. (1993) 36:1230-1238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GRANT JA, PICKUP BT: A gaussian description of molecular shape. J. Phys. Chem. (1995) 99:3503-3510.
   Google Scholar
• CHEESERIGHT T, MACKEY M, ROSE S, VINTER A: Molecular field extrema as descriptors of biological activity: definition and validation. J. Chem. Inf. Model. (2006) 46:665-676.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JAIN AN: Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. J. Med. Chem. (2003) 46:499-511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PATTERSON DE, CRAMER RD, FERGUSON AM, CLARK RD, WEINBERGER LE: Neighborhood behavior: a useful concept for validation of molecular diversity descriptors. J. Med. Chem. (1996) 39:3049-60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CRAMER RD, CLARK RD, PATTERSON DE, FERGUSON AM: Bioisosterism as a molecular diversity descriptor: steric fields of single topomeric conformers. J. Med. Chem. (1996) 39:3060-3069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JILEK RJ, CRAMER RD: Topomers: a validated protocol for their self-consistent generation. J. Chem. Inf. Comp. Sci. (2004) 44:1221-1227.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• CRAMER RD, PATTERSON DE, BUNCE JD: Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA): effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. (1988) 110:5959-5967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZHU LL, HOU TJ, CHEN LR, XU XJ: 3D QSAR analyses of novel tyrosine kinase inhibitors based on pharmacophore alignment, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (2001) 41:1032-1040.
   Google Scholar
• CRAMER RD, PATTERSON DE, CLARK RD, SOLTANSHAHI F, LAWLESS MS: Virtual libraries: a new approach to decision making in molecular discovery research. J. Chem. Inf. Comp. Sci. (1998) 6:1010-1023.
   Google Scholar