Advanced search
Publication Cover
Future Medicinal Chemistry Volume 6, 2014 - Issue 11
Submit an article Journal homepage
369
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Focused Chemical Libraries – Design and Enrichment: An Example of Protein–Protein Interaction Chemical Space

Xu Zhang1 State Key Laboratory of Structural Chemistry, Fujian Institute of Research on the Structure of Matter, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 155 Yang Qiao Xi Lu, Fuzhou, Fujian350002, China;2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing100049, China;3 Cancer Research Centre of Marseille (CRCM), CNRS UMR7258, INSERM U1068, Institut Paoli - Calmettes, Aix-Marseille Université UM105F-13009, Marseille, FranceView further author information
,
Stéphane Betzi3 Cancer Research Centre of Marseille (CRCM), CNRS UMR7258, INSERM U1068, Institut Paoli - Calmettes, Aix-Marseille Université UM105F-13009, Marseille, FranceView further author information
,
Xavier Morelli3 Cancer Research Centre of Marseille (CRCM), CNRS UMR7258, INSERM U1068, Institut Paoli - Calmettes, Aix-Marseille Université UM105F-13009, Marseille, FranceView further author information
&
Philippe Roche3 Cancer Research Centre of Marseille (CRCM), CNRS UMR7258, INSERM U1068, Institut Paoli - Calmettes, Aix-Marseille Université UM105F-13009, Marseille, FranceCorrespondence[email protected]
View further author information
Pages 1291-1307 | Published online: 27 Aug 2014

References

  • Munoz B . The FDA approvals of 2013: a watershed? Forbes, 3rd January (2014). www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmunos/2014/01/03/the-fda-approvals-of-2013-a-watershed/
  • Lipinski C , LombardoF, DominyB, FeeneyP. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings.Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.46(1–3), 3–26 (2001).
  • Veber DF , JohnsonSR, ChengHY, SmithBR, WardKW, KoppleKD. Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates.J. Med. Chem.45(12), 2615–2623 (2002).
  • Oprea TI . Property distribution of drug-related chemical databases.J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des.14(3), 251–264 (2000).
  • Hughes JD , BlaggJ, PriceDAet al. Physiochemical drug properties associated with in vivo toxicological outcomes. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 18(17), 4872–4875 (2008).
  • Lajiness MS , ViethM, EricksonJ. Molecular properties that influence oral drug-like behavior.Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel.7(4), 470–477 (2004).
  • Gleeson MP , HerseyA, HannongbuaS. In-silico ADME models: a general assessment of their utility in drug discovery applications. Curr. Top. Med. Chem.11(4), 358–381 (2011).
  • Gleeson MP , HerseyA, MontanariD, OveringtonJ. Probing the links between in vitro potency, ADMET and physicochemical parameters.Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.10(3), 197–208 (2011).
  • Bickerton GR , PaoliniGV, BesnardJ, MuresanS, HopkinsAL. Quantifying the chemical beauty of drugs.Nat. Chem.4(2), 90–98 (2012).
  • Gleeson MP , ModiS, BenderAet al. The challenges involved in modeling toxicity data in silico: a review. Curr. Pharm. Des. 18(9), 1266–1291 (2012).
  • Gleeson MP , MontanariD. Strategies for the generation, validation and application of in silico ADMET models in lead generation and optimization. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol.8(11), 1435–1446 (2012).
  • Gupta S . New drug development. In: Drug Discovery and Clinical Research. JayPee Brothers Medical Publishers Ltd, Delhi, India, 1–135 (2011).
  • Gregori-Puigjané E , MestresJ. Coverage and bias in chemical library design.Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.12(3), 359–365 (2008).
  • Lipkin MJ , StevensAP, LivingstoneDJ, HarrisCJ. How large does a compound screening collection need to be?Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen.11(6), 482–493 (2008).
  • Morelli X , BourgeasR, RocheP. Chemical and structural lessons from recent successes in protein–protein interaction inhibition (2P2I).Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.15(4), 475–481 (2011).
  • Mullard A . Protein–protein interaction inhibitors get into the groove.Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.11(March 2012), 173–175 (2012).
  • Makley LN , GestwickiJE. Expanding the number of ‘druggable’ targets: non-enzymes and protein–protein interactions.Chem. Biol. Drug Des.81(1), 22–32 (2013).
  • Higueruelo AP , SchreyerA, BickertonGRJ, PittWR, GroomCR, BlundellTL. Atomic interactions and profile of small molecules disrupting protein–protein interfaces: the TIMBAL database.Chem. Biol. Drug Des.74(5), 457–467 (2009).
  • Bourgeas R , Basse M-J, Morelli X, Roche P. Atomic analysis of protein–protein interfaces with known inhibitors: the 2P2I database. PLoS ONE5(3), e9598 (2010).
  • Basse MJ , BetziS, BourgeasRet al. 2P2Idb: a structural database dedicated to orthosteric modulation of protein–protein interactions. Nucleic Acids Res. 41(Database issue), D824–D827 (2013).
  • Higueruelo AP , JubbH, BlundellTL. TIMBAL v2: update of a database holding small molecules modulating protein–protein interactions.Database (Oxford)2013, bat039 (2013).
  • Labbé CM , LacondeG, KuenemannMA, VilloutreixBO, SperandioO. iPPI-DB: a manually curated and interactive database of small non-peptide inhibitors of protein–protein interactions.Drug Discov. Today18(19–20), 958–968 (2013).
  • Kozakov D , HallDR, ChuangGYet al. Structural conservation of druggable hot spots in protein–protein interfaces. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108(33), 13528–13533 (2011).
  • Sugaya N , FuruyaT. Dr. PIAS: an integrative system for assessing the druggability of protein–protein interactions.BMC Bioinformatics12, 50 (2011).
  • Wanner J , FryDC, PengZ, RobertsJ. Druggability assessment of protein–protein interfaces.Future Med. Chem.3(16), 2021–2038 (2011).
  • Koes DR , CamachoCJ. PocketQuery: protein–protein interaction inhibitor starting points from protein–protein interaction structure.Nucleic Acids Res.40(Web Server issue), W387–W392 (2012).
  • Metz A , CigliaE, GohlkeH. Modulating protein–protein interactions: from structural determinants of binding to druggability prediction to application.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(30), 4630–4647 (2012).
  • Ulucan O , EyrischS, HelmsV. Druggability of dynamic protein–protein interfaces.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(30), 4599–4606 (2012).
  • Hamon V , MorelliX. Druggability of protein–protein interactions. In: Understanding and Exploiting Protein–Protein Interactions as Drug Targets. Future Science Ltd, London, UK, 18–31 (2013).
  • Higueruelo AP , JubbH, BlundellTL. Protein–protein interactions as druggable targets: recent technological advances.Curr. Opin. Pharmacol.13(5), 791–796 (2013).
  • Reynes C , HostH, CamprouxACet al. Designing focused chemical libraries enriched in protein–protein interaction inhibitors using machine-learning methods. PLoS Comput. Biol. 6(3), e1000695 (2010).
  • Sperandio O , ReynèsC, CamprouxA, VilloutreixB. Rationalizing the chemical space of protein–protein interaction inhibitors.Drug Discov. Today15(5–6), 220–229 (2010).
  • Sperandio O . Editorial: toward the design of drugs on protein–protein interactions.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(30), 4585 (2012).
  • Villoutreix BO , LabbéCM, LagorceD, LacondeG, SperandioO. A leap into the chemical space of protein–protein interaction inhibitors.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(30), 4648–4667 (2012).
  • Fry D , HuangKS, Di Lello P et al. Design of libraries targeting protein–protein interfaces. ChemMedChem8(5), 726–732 (2013).
  • Hamon V , BrunelJM, CombesS, BasseMJ, RocheP, MorelliX. 2P2Ichem: focused chemical libraries dedicated to orthosteric modulation of protein–protein interactions.MedChemComm4(5), 797–809 (2013).
  • Hamon V , BourgeasR, DucrotPet al. 2P2I HUNTER: a tool for filtering orthosteric protein–protein interaction modulators via a dedicated support vector machine. J. R. Soc. Interface 11(90), 20130860 (2014).
  • Berman HM , WestbrookJ, FengZet al. The protein data bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 28(1), 235–242 (2000).
  • Gutmanas A , AlhroubY, BattleGMet al. PDBe: Protein Data Bank in Europe. Nucleic Acids Res. 42(Database issue), D285–D291 (2014).
  • Berman HM , KleywegtGJ, NakamuraH, MarkleyJL. The future of the protein data bank.Biopolymers99(3), 218–222 (2013).
  • Rose PW , BiC, BluhmWFet al. The RCSB Protein Data Bank: new resources for research and education. Nucleic Acids Res. 41(Database issue), D475–D482 (2013).
  • DrugBank database. www.drugbank.ca
  • Vieth M , SutherlandJJ, RobertsonDH, CampbellRM. Kinomics: characterizing the therapeutically validated kinase space.Drug Discov. Today10(12), 839–846 (2005).
  • Harris CJ , HillRD, SheppardDW, SlaterMJ, StoutenPF. The design and application of target-focused compound libraries.Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen.14(6), 521–531 (2011).
  • Sutherland JJ , GaoC, CahyaS, ViethM. What general conclusions can we draw from kinase profiling data sets?Biochim. Biophys. Acta1834(7), 1425–1433 (2013).
  • Acharya C , CoopA, PolliJE, MackerellAD. Recent advances in ligand-based drug design: relevance and utility of the conformationally sampled pharmacophore approach.Curr. Comput. Aided Drug Des.7(1), 10–22 (2011).
  • Favia AD . Theoretical and computational approaches to ligand-based drug discovery.Front. Biosci. (Landmark Ed.)16, 1276–1290 (2011).
  • Ripphausen P , NisiusB, BajorathJ. State-of-the-art in ligand-based virtual screening.Drug Discov. Today16(9–10), 372–376 (2011).
  • Sukumar N , DasS. Current trends in virtual high throughput screening using ligand-based and structure-based methods.Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen.14(10), 872–888 (2011).
  • Wilson GL , LillMA. Integrating structure-based and ligand-based approaches for computational drug design.Future Med. Chem.3(6), 735–750 (2011).
  • Chen L , MorrowJK, TranHT, PhatakSS, Du-CunyL, ZhangS. From laptop to benchtop to bedside: structure-based drug design on protein targets.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(9), 1217–1239 (2012).
  • Cheng T , LiQ, ZhouZ, WangY, BryantSH. Structure-based virtual screening for drug discovery: a problem-centric review.AAPS J.14(1), 133–141 (2012).
  • Pirhadi S , ShiriF, GhasemiJB. Methods and applications of structure based pharmacophores in drug discovery.Curr. Top. Med. Chem.13(9), 1036–1047 (2013).
  • Sheppard DW , LipkinMJ, HarrisCJ, CatanaC, StoutenPF. Strategies for small molecule library design.Curr. Pharm. Des.19, 1–9 (2013).
  • Sheppard DW , MacRitchieJA. Building in molecular diversity for targeted libraries.Drug Discov. Today Technol.10(4), e461–466 (2013).
  • Geppert H , VogtM, BajorathJ. Current trends in ligand-based virtual screening: molecular representations, data mining methods, new application areas, and performance evaluation.J. Chem. Inf. Model50(2), 205–216 (2010).
  • Butkiewicz M , LoweEW, MuellerRet al. Benchmarking ligand-based virtual high-throughput screening with the PubChem database. Molecules 18(1), 735–756 (2013).
  • Rush TS , GrantJA, MosyakL, NichollsA. A shape-based 3-D scaffold hopping method and its application to a bacterial protein–protein interaction.J. Med. Chem.48(5), 1489–1495 (2005).
  • Tawa GJ , BaberJC, HumbletC. Computation of 3D queries for ROCS based virtual screens.J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des.23(12), 853–868 (2009).
  • Ebalunode JO , ZhengW. Molecular shape technologies in drug discovery: methods and applications.Curr. Top. Med. Chem.10(6), 669–679 (2010).
  • AbdulHameed MD , ChaudhuryS, SinghN, SunH, WallqvistA, TawaGJ. Exploring polypharmacology using a ROCS-based target fishing approach.J. Chem. Inf. Model52(2), 492–505 (2012).
  • Ballester PJ . Ultrafast shape recognition: method and applications.Future Med. Chem.3(1), 65–78 (2011).
  • Cannon EO , NigschF, MitchellJB. A novel hybrid ultrafast shape descriptor method for use in virtual screening.Chem. Cent. J.2, 3 (2008).
  • Armstrong MS , FinnPW, MorrisGM, RichardsWG. Improving the accuracy of ultrafast ligand-based screening: incorporating lipophilicity into ElectroShape as an extra dimension.J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des.25(8), 785–790 (2011).
  • Schreyer AM , BlundellT. USRCAT: real-time ultrafast shape recognition with pharmacophoric constraints.J. Cheminform.4(1), 27 (2012).
  • Sutherland JJ , NandigamRK, EricksonJA, ViethM. Lessons in molecular recognition. 2. Assessing and improving cross-docking accuracy.J. Chem. Inf. Model.47(6), 2293–2302 (2007).
  • Meng XY , ZhangHX, MezeiM, CuiM. Molecular docking: a powerful approach for structure-based drug discovery.Curr. Comput. Aided Drug Des.7(2), 146–157 (2011).
  • Gozalbes R , SimonL, FroloffN, SartoriE, MonteilsC, BaudelleR. Development and experimental validation of a docking strategy for the generation of kinase-targeted libraries.J. Med. Chem.51(11), 3124–3132 (2008).
  • Korb O , StützleT, ExnerTE. Accelerating molecular docking calculations using graphics processing units.J. Chem. Inf. Model51(4), 865–876 (2011).
  • Wu J , HongB, TakedaT, GuoJT. High performance transcription factor-DNA docking with GPU computing.Proteome Sci.10(Suppl. 1), S17 (2012).
  • Ballester PJ , MangoldM, HowardNIet al. Hierarchical virtual screening for the discovery of new molecular scaffolds in antibacterial hit identification. J. R. Soc. Interface 9(77), 3196–3207 (2012).
  • Morelli X , HuppT. Searching for the Holy Grail; protein–protein interaction analysis and modulation.EMBO Rep.13(10), 877–879 (2012).
  • Stumpf M , ThorneT, de Silva E et al. Estimating the size of the human interactome. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA105(19), 6959–6964 (2008).
  • Venkatesan K , RualJ, VazquezAet al. An empirical framework for binary interactome mapping. Nat. Methods 6(1), 83–90 (2009).
  • Arkin MR , WhittyA. The road less traveled: modulating signal transduction enzymes by inhibiting their protein–protein interactions.Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.13(3), 284–290 (2009).
  • Wilson AJ . Inhibition of protein–protein interactions using designed molecules.Chem. Soc. Rev.38(12), 3289–3300 (2009).
  • Zinzalla G , ThurstonDE. Targeting protein–protein interactions for therapeutic intervention: a challenge for the future.Future Med. Chem.1(1), 65–93 (2009).
  • Selivanova G . Therapeutic targeting of p53 by small molecules.Semin. Cancer Biol.20(1), 46–56 (2010).
  • Ballatore C , BrundenKR, TrojanowskiJQ, LeeVM, SmithAB, HurynDM. Modulation of protein–protein interactions as a therapeutic strategy for the treatment of neurodegenerative tauopathies.Curr. Top. Med. Chem.11(3), 317–330 (2011).
  • Fry D . Small-Molecule Inhibitors of Protein–Protein Interactions. Vassilev L, Fry D (Eds). Springer, NJ, USA (2011).
  • Garner AL , JandaKD. Protein–protein interactions and cancer: targeting the central dogma.Curr. Top. Med. Chem.11(3), 258–280 (2011).
  • Wilson CG , ArkinMR. Small-molecule inhibitors of IL-2/IL-2R: lessons learned and applied.Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol.348, 25–59 (2011).
  • Bienstock RJ . Computational drug design targeting protein–protein interactions.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(9), 1240–1254 (2012).
  • Fry DC . Small-molecule inhibitors of protein–protein interactions: how to mimic a protein partner.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(30), 4679–4684 (2012).
  • Khoury K , DömlingA. P53 MDM2 inhibitors.Curr. Pharm. Des.18(30), 4668–4678 (2012).
  • Fayne D . De-peptidising protein–protein interactions – big jobs for small molecules.Drug Discov. Today Technol.10(4), e467–e474 (2013).
  • Grillo-Bosch D , ChoquetD, SainlosM. Inhibition of PDZ domain-mediated interactions.Drug Discov. Today Technol.10(4), e531–e540 (2013).
  • Ivanov AA , KhuriFR, FuH. Targeting protein–protein interactions as an anticancer strategy.Trends Pharmacol. Sci.34(7), 393–400 (2013).
  • Milroy LG , BrunsveldL, OttmannC. Stabilization and inhibition of protein–protein interactions: the 14-13-3 case study.ACS Chem. Biol.8(1), 27–35 (2013).
  • Mori M , VignaroliG, BottaM. Small molecules modulation of 14-13-3 protein–protein interactions.Drug Discov. Today Technol.10(4), e541–547 (2013).
  • Ottmann C . Small-molecule modulation of protein–protein interactions.Drug Discov. Today Technol.10(4), e499–500 (2013).
  • Silvian L , EnyedyI, KumaravelG. Inhibitors of protein–protein interactions: new methodologies to tackle this challenge.Drug Discov. Today Technol.10(4), e509–e515 (2013).
  • Wilson CG , ArkinMR. Probing structural adaptivity at PPI interfaces with small molecules.Drug Discov. Today Technol.10(4), e501–508 (2013).
  • Zhou G , ChuS. Discovery of small molecule fusion inhibitors targeting HIV-1 gp41.Curr. Pharm. Des.19(10), 1818–1826 (2013).
  • Zinzalla G . Understanding and Exploiting Protein–Protein Interactions as Drug Targets. Future Science Ltd, London, UK (2013).
  • Falchi F , CaporuscioF, RecanatiniM. Structure-based design of small-molecule protein–protein interaction modulators: the story so far.Future Med. Chem.6(3), 343–357 (2014).
  • Ferro S , De LucaL, MorrealeFet al. Synthesis and biological evaluation of novel antiviral agents as protein–protein interaction inhibitors. J. Enzyme Inhib. Med. Chem.29(2), 237–242 (2014).
  • Jin L , WangW, FangG. Targeting protein–protein interaction by small molecules.Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.54, 435–456 (2014).
  • Nero TL , MortonCJ, HolienJK, WielensJ, ParkerMW. Oncogenic protein interfaces: small molecules, big challenges.Nat. Rev. Cancer14(4), 248–262 (2014).
  • HTStec. Future Directions of HTS Trends. HTStec, Cambridge, London, 1–9 (2012).
  • Yin H , HamiltonAD. Strategies for targeting protein–protein interactions with synthetic agents.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl.44(27), 4130–4163 (2005).
  • Fletcher S , HamiltonAD. Targeting protein–protein interactions by rational design: mimicry of protein surfaces.J. R. Soc. Interface3(7), 215–233 (2006).
  • Davis JM , TsouLK, HamiltonAD. Synthetic non-peptide mimetics of alpha-helices.Chem. Soc. Rev.36(2), 326–334 (2007).
  • Vagner J , QuH, HrubyVJ. Peptidomimetics, a synthetic tool of drug discovery.Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.12(3), 292–296 (2008).
  • Benyamini H , FriedlerA. Using peptides to study protein–protein interactions.Future Med. Chem.2(6), 989–1003 (2010).
  • Azzarito V , LongK, MurphyNS, WilsonAJ. Inhibition of α-helix-mediated protein–protein interactions using designed molecules.Nat. Chem.5(3), 161–173 (2013).
  • Hruby VJ , CaiM. Design of peptide and peptidomimetic ligands with novel pharmacological activity profiles.Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.53, 557–580 (2013).
  • Isvoran A , CraciunD, MartinyV, SperandioO, MitevaMA. Computational analysis of protein–protein interfaces involving an alpha helix: insights for terphenyl-like molecules binding.BMC Pharmacol. Toxicol.14, 31 (2013).
  • Akram ON , DegraffDJ, SheehanJHet al. Tailoring peptidomimetics for targeting protein–protein interactions. Mol. Cancer Res. 12(7), 967–978 (2014).
  • Jayatunga MK , ThompsonS, HamiltonAD. α-helix mimetics: outwards and upwards.Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett.24(3), 717–724 (2014).
  • Pagliaro L , FeldingJ, AudouzeKet al. Emerging classes of protein–protein interaction inhibitors and new tools for their development. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 8(4), 442–449 (2004).
  • Neugebauer A , HartmannRW, KleinCD. Prediction of protein–protein interaction inhibitors by chemoinformatics and machine learning methods.J. Med. Chem.50(19), 4665–4668 (2007).
  • Wells JA , McClendonCL. Reaching for high-hanging fruit in drug discovery at protein–protein interfaces.Nature450(7172), 1001–1009 (2007).
  • ASINEX’s Protein–Protein Interactions (PPI) Library. www.asinex.com/PPI_Library.html
  • Drug-Like Compounds from ChemDiv. http://us.chemdiv.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=85&Itemid=184
  • Life Chemicals: Online Building Blocks Shop. www.lifechemicals.com/downloads/9356/13062/13074
  • Target-focused libraries. www.otavachemicals.com/products/target-focused-libraries/protein-protein-interaction
  • Bromodomain Containing Protein 4 Brd4-Focused Library. www.otavachemicals.com/targets/bromodomain-containing-protein-4-brd4-focused-library
  • 2P2I Hunter. http://2p2idb.cnrs-mrs.fr/2p2i_hunter.html
  • Fuller JC , BurgoyneNJ, JacksonRM. Predicting druggable binding sites at the protein–protein interface.Drug Discovery Today14(3–4), 155–161 (2009).
  • Lovering F , BikkerJ, HumbletC. Escape from flatland: increasing saturation as an approach to improving clinical success.J. Med. Chem.52(21), 6752–6756 (2009).
  • Marson CM . New and unusual scaffolds in medicinal chemistry.Chem Soc Rev.40(11), 5514–5533 (2011).
  • Dragon 6. www.talete.mi.it
  • Tse C , ShoemakerAR, AdickesJet al. ABT-263: a potent and orally bioavailable Bcl-2 family inhibitor. Cancer Res. 68(9), 3421–3428 (2008).
  • Ackler S , MittenMJ, FosterKet al. The Bcl-2 inhibitor ABT-263 enhances the response of multiple chemotherapeutic regimens in hematologic tumors in vivo. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 66(5), 869–880 (2010).
  • Tahir SK , WassJ, JosephMKet al. Identification of expression signatures predictive of sensitivity to the Bcl-2 family member inhibitor ABT-263 in small cell lung carcinoma and leukemia/lymphoma cell lines. Mol. Cancer Ther. 9(3), 545–557 (2010).
  • Gandhi L , CamidgeDR, Ribeiro de Oliveira M et al. Phase I study of navitoclax (ABT-263), a novel Bcl-2 family inhibitor, in patients with small-cell lung cancer and other solid tumors. J. Clin. Oncol.29(7), 909–916 (2011).
  • Zuegg J , CooperMA. Drug-likeness and increased hydrophobicity of commercially available compound libraries for drug screening.Curr. Top. Med. Chem.12(14), 1500–1513 (2012).
  • Walters WP , MurckoMA. Prediction of ‘drug-likeness’.Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.54(3), 255–271 (2002).
  • Rishton GM . Nonleadlikeness and leadlikeness in biochemical screening.Drug Discov. Today8(2), 86–96 (2003).
  • Moreira IS , MartinsJM, RamosRM, FernandesPA, RamosMJ. Understanding the importance of the aromatic amino-acid residues as hot-spots.Biochim. Biophys. Acta1834(1), 404–414 (2013).
  • Fry DC , So S-S. Modulators of protein–protein interactions: importance of three-dimensionality. In: Protein–Protein Interactions in Drug Discovery. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim, Germany, 55–62 (2013).
  • Lipinski C , HopkinsA. Navigating chemical space for biology and medicine.Nature432(7019), 855–861 (2004).
  • Renner S , van OtterloWA, Dominguez SeoaneMet al. Bioactivity-guided mapping and navigation of chemical space. Nat. Chem. Biol.5(8), 585–592 (2009).
  • Reymond JL , AwaleM. Exploring chemical space for drug discovery using the chemical universe database.ACS Chem. Neurosci.3(9), 649–657 (2012).
  • Ruddigkeit L , BlumLC, ReymondJL. Visualization and virtual screening of the chemical universe database GDB-17.J. Chem. Inf. Model53(1), 56–65 (2013).
  • Schwartz J , AwaleM, ReymondJL. SMIfp (SMILES fingerprint) chemical space for virtual screening and visualization of large databases of organic molecules.J. Chem. Inf. Model53(8), 1979–1989 (2013).
  • Oprea TI , GottfriesJ. Chemography: the art of navigating in chemical space.J. Comb. Chem.3(2), 157–166 (2001).
  • Colliandre L , Le Guilloux V, Bourg S, Morin-Allory L. Visual characterization and diversity quantification of chemical libraries: 2. Analysis and selection of size-independent, subspace-specific diversity indices. J. Chem. Inf. Model52(2), 327–342 (2012).
  • Le Guilloux V , ColliandreL, BourgS, GuénegouG, Dubois-ChevalierJ, Morin-AlloryL. Visual characterization and diversity quantification of chemical libraries: 1. creation of delimited reference chemical subspaces.J. Chem. Inf. Model51(8), 1762–1774 (2011).
  • Screening Assistant 2. http://sa2.sourceforge.net
  • Le Guilloux V , ArraultA, ColliandreL, BourgS, VayerP, Morin-AlloryL. Mining collections of compounds with Screening Assistant 2.J. Cheminform.4(1), 20 (2012).

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.