Chemical similarity searches: when is complexity justified?

Bibliography

• BENDER A, GLEN RC: Molecular similarity: a key technique in molecular informatics. Org. Biomol. Chem. (2004) 2:3204-3218.
   Google Scholar
• MILLER MA: Chemical database techniques in drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. (2002) 1:220-227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NIKOLOVA N, JAWORSKA J: Approaches to measure chemical similarity – a review. QSAR Comb. Sci. (2003) 22:1006-1026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SHERIDAN RP, KEARSLEY SK: Why do we need so many chemical similarity methods? Drug Discov. Today (2002) 7:903-911.
   Google Scholar
• WILLETT P: Searching techniques for databases of two- and three-dimensional chemical structures. J. Med. Chem. (2005) 48:4183-4199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GLEN RC, ADAMS SE: Similarity metrics and descriptor spaces – which combinations to choose? QSAR Comb. Sci. (2006) 25:1133-1142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WILLETT P: Similarity-based virtual screening using 2D fingerprints. Drug Discov. Today (2006) 11:1046-1053.
   Google Scholar
• JOHNSON MA, MAGGIORA GM (Eds): Concepts and Applicatons of Molecular Similarity. John Wiley (1990).
   Google Scholar
• MARTIN YC, KOFRON JL, TRAPHAGEN LM: Do structurally similar molecules have similar biological activity? J. Med. Chem. (2002) 45:4350-4358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MCGAUGHEY GB, SHERIDAN RP, BAYLY CI et al.: Comparison of topological, shape, and docking methods in virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model (Submitted).
   PubMedGoogle 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
• HAWKINS PCD, SKILLMAN AG, NICHOLLS A: Comparison of shape-matching and docking as virtual screening tools. J. Med. Chem. (2007) 50:74-82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SHERIDAN RP, FEUSTON BP, MAIOROV VN et al.: Similarity to molecules in the training set is a good discriminator for prediction accuracy in QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (2004) 44:1912-1928.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• PATTERSON DE, CRAMER RD, FERGUSON AM et al.: Neighborhood behavior: a useful concept for validation of ‘molecular diversity’ descriptors. J. Med. Chem. (1996) 39:3049-3059.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EDGAR SJ, HOLLIDAY JD, WILLETT P: Effectiveness of retrieval in similarity searches of chemical databases: a review of performance measures. J. Mol. Graph. Model. (2000) 18:343-357.
   Google Scholar
• SCHNEIDER G, SCHNEIDER P, RENNER S: Scaffold-hopping: how far can you jump? QSAR Comb. Sci. (2006) 25:1162-1171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HUANG N, SHOICHET BK, IRWIN JJ: Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem. (2006) 49:6789-6801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CARHART RE, SMITH DH, VENKATARAGHAVAN R: Atom pairs as molecular features in structure–activity studies: definition and applications. J. Chem. Inform. Comp. Sci. (1985) 25:64-73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SHERIDAN RP, SINGH SB, FLUDER EM et al.: Protocols for bridging the peptide to nonpeptide gap in topological similarity searches. J. Chem. Inform. Comp. Sci. (2001) 41:1395-1406.
   Web of Science ®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) 47:6144-6159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JAIN AN: Morphological similarity: a 3D molecular similarity method correlated with protein–ligand recognition. J. Comput. Aided Molec. Des. (2000) 14:199-213.
   Google Scholar
• BROWN RD, MARTIN YC: The information content of 2D and 3D structural descriptors relevant to ligand–receptor binding. J. Chem. Inf. Comp. Sci. (1997) 37:1-9
   Google Scholar
• BAJORATH J: Selected concepts and investigations in compound classification, molecular descriptor analysis, and virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (2001) 41:233-245.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• GOOD AC, HERMSMEIER MA, HINDLE SA: Measuring CAMD technique performance: a virtual screening case study in the design of validation experiments. J. Comput.-Aided Molec. Des. (2004) 18:529-536.
   Google Scholar
• MASON JS, MORIZE I, MENARD PR et al.: New 4-point pharmacophore method for molecular similarity and diversity applications: overview of the method and applications, including a novel approach to the design of combinatorial libraries containing privileged structures. J. Med. Chem. (1999) 42:3251-3264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CLEVES AE, JAIN AN: Robust ligand-based modeling of the biological targets of known drugs. J. Med. Chem. (2006) 49:2921-2938.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BIRCHALL K, GILLET VJ, HARPER G, PICKETT SD: Training similarity measures for specific activities: application to reduced graphs. J. Chem. Inf. Model (2006) 46:577-586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• STIEFL N,WATSON IA, BAUMANN K et al.: ErG: 2D pharmacophore descriptions for scaffold hopping. J. Chem. Inf. Model (2006) 46:208-220.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HULL RD, SINGH SB, NACHBAR RB et al.: Chemical similarity searches using latent semantic structural indexing (LaSSI) and comparison to TOPOSIM. J. Med. Chem. (2001) 44:1185-1191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• XUE L, BAJORATH J: Molecular descriptors for effective classification of biologically active compounds based on principal component analysis identified by a genetic algorithm. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (2000) 40:801-809.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• SINGH SB, SHERIDAN RP, FLUDER EM et al.: Mining the chemical quarry with joint chemical probes: an application of latent semantic structure indexing (LaSSI) and TOPOSIM (Dice) to chemical database mining. J. Med. Chem. (2001) 44:1564-1575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GODDEN JW, FURR JR, XUE L et al.: Molecular similarity analysis and virtual screening by mapping of consensus positions in binary-transformed chemical descriptor spaces with variable dimensionality. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. (2004) 44:21-29.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• HERT J, WILLETT P, WILTON DJ: New methods for ligand-based virtual screening: use of data fusion and machine learning to enhance the effectiveness of similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Model. (2006) 46:462-470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BABER JC, SHIRLEY WA, GAO Y et al.: The use of consensus scoring in ligand-based virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. (2006) 46:277-288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SHERIDAN RP, NACHBAR RB, BUSH BL: Extending the trend vector: the trend matrix and sample-based partial least squares. J. Comput.-Aided Molec. Des. (1994) 8:323-340.
   Google Scholar