PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 9334903

Multiple automatic base selection: protein-ligand docking based on incremental construction without manual intervention.

Abstract

A possible way of tackling the molecular docking problem arising in computer-aided drug design is the use of the incremental construction method. This method consists of three steps: the selection of a part of a molecule, a so-called base fragment, the placement of the base fragment into the active site of a protein, and the subsequent reconstruction of the complete drug molecule. Assuming that a part of a drug molecule is known, which is specific enough to be a good base fragment, the method is proven to be successful for a large set of docking examples. In addition, it leads to the fastest algorithms for flexible docking published so far. In most real-world applications of docking, large sets of ligands have to be tested for affinity to a given protein. Thus, manual selection of a base fragment is not practical. On the other hand, the selection of a base fragment is critical in that only few selections lead to a low-energy structure. We overcome this limitation by selecting a representative set of base fragments instead of a single one. In this paper, we present a set of rules and algorithms to automate this selection. In addition, we extend the incremental construction method to deal with multiple fragmentations of the drug molecule. Our results show that with multiple automated base selection, the quality of the docking predictions is almost as good as with one manually preselected base fragment. In addition, the set of solutions is more diverse and alternative binding modes with low scores are found. Although the run time of the overall algorithm increases, the method remains fast enough to search through large ligand data sets.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Rarey, B Kramer, T Lengauer. 1997. Multiple automatic base selection: protein-ligand docking based on incremental construction without manual intervention.. https://doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1007913026166

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Combinatorial chemistry, automation and molecular diversity: new trends in the pharmaceutical industry.

Combinatorial chemistry has emerged as a set of novel strategies for the synthesis of large sets of compounds (combinatorial libraries) for biological evaluation. Within a few years combinatorial chemistry has undergone a series of changes in trends, which are closely related to two important factors in libraries: numbers and quality. While the number of compounds in a library may be easily expressed, it is a lot more difficult to indicate the degree of quality of a library. This degree of quality can be split into two aspects: purity and diversity. The changing trends in combinatorial chemistry with respect to the strategies, the technologies, the libraries themselves (numbers and purity aspects) and the molecular diversity are outlined in this paper.

Automation

Fully automated analytical method for codeine quantification in human plasma using on-line solid-phase extraction and high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection.

A simple, sensitive and fully automated analytical method for the analysis of codeine in human plasma is presented. Samples are added with oxycodone, used as internal standard (I.S.), and directly loaded in the autosampler tray. An on-line sample clean-up system based on solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridges (Bond-Elut C2, 20 mg) and value switching (Prospekt) is used. Isocratic elution improved reproducibility and allowed the recirculation of the mobile phase. A Hypersil BDS C18, 3 microns, 10 x 0.46 cm column was used and detection was done by UV monitoring at 212 nm. Retention times of norcodeine (codeine metabolite), codeine and oxycodone (I.S.) were 5.5, 6.4 and 9.1 min, respectively. Morphine was left to elute in the chromatographic front. Detection limit for codeine was 0.5 microgram l-1 and inter-assay precision (expressed as relative standard deviation) and accuracy (expressed as relative error) measured at 2 micrograms l-1 were 5.03% and 1.82%. Calibration range was 2-140 micrograms l-1.

Automation