19.02.2013 Views

Reviews in Computational Chemistry Volume 18

Reviews in Computational Chemistry Volume 18

Reviews in Computational Chemistry Volume 18

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

62 The Use of Scor<strong>in</strong>g Functions <strong>in</strong> Drug Discovery Applications<br />

(i.e., the scor<strong>in</strong>g function is used as the objective function <strong>in</strong> dock<strong>in</strong>g), rank<br />

order<strong>in</strong>g a set of ligands with respect to the same prote<strong>in</strong> (Ki prediction),<br />

and the use of scor<strong>in</strong>g functions to discover weakly b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g compounds<br />

from a large database of mostly nonb<strong>in</strong>ders (virtual screen<strong>in</strong>g). Note that<br />

the latter two tasks are <strong>in</strong>deed very different. In virtual screen<strong>in</strong>g, the focus<br />

is on elim<strong>in</strong>ation of nonb<strong>in</strong>ders, whereas the correct rank order of weakly,<br />

medium, and strongly b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g molecules is of secondary <strong>in</strong>terest.<br />

Even when the criteria are clear, a comprehensive assessment of scor<strong>in</strong>g<br />

functions is difficult because very few functions have been tested on the same<br />

data sets. For example, studies where each scor<strong>in</strong>g function is used <strong>in</strong> conjunction<br />

with two different dock<strong>in</strong>g algorithms (e.g., Ref. 170) are not mean<strong>in</strong>gful<br />

<strong>in</strong> this context, because each dock<strong>in</strong>g algorithm produces different sets of solution<br />

structures. For structure prediction, several studies have shown that<br />

knowledge-based scor<strong>in</strong>g functions are at least as good as empirical functions.<br />

They are somewhat ‘‘softer’’ than empirical functions, 162 mean<strong>in</strong>g that small<br />

root-mean-square deviations from the crystal structure usually do not lead to<br />

huge changes <strong>in</strong> score, a fact that can ma<strong>in</strong>ly be attributed to the neglect of<br />

directionality. The PMF function has been successfully applied to structure<br />

prediction of <strong>in</strong>hibitors of neuram<strong>in</strong>idase 88 and stromelys<strong>in</strong> 1 (matrix metalloprotease-3;<br />

MMP-3) <strong>18</strong>2 <strong>in</strong> the program DOCK, yield<strong>in</strong>g superior results to<br />

the DOCK force field and chemical scor<strong>in</strong>g options. The DrugScore function<br />

was tested on a large set of PDB complexes and gave significantly better results<br />

than the standard FlexX scor<strong>in</strong>g function with FlexX as the dock<strong>in</strong>g eng<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

DrugScore performed as well as the force field score <strong>in</strong> DOCK, but outperformed<br />

chemical scor<strong>in</strong>g. Grueneberg, Wendt, and Klebe 15 used the Drug-<br />

Score function <strong>in</strong> a virtual screen<strong>in</strong>g study to f<strong>in</strong>d novel carbonic anhydrase<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitors (see the section on Application of Scor<strong>in</strong>g Functions <strong>in</strong> Virtual<br />

Screen<strong>in</strong>g later <strong>in</strong> this chapter). Two of the virtual hits that turned out to be<br />

highly active compounds were then exam<strong>in</strong>ed crystallographically. The dock<strong>in</strong>g<br />

solution predicted by DrugScore was closer to the experimental structure<br />

than that predicted by the FlexX score.<br />

Although the objective function (the function whose global m<strong>in</strong>imum is<br />

searched dur<strong>in</strong>g dock<strong>in</strong>g) is used for both structure generation and energy evaluation<br />

<strong>in</strong> many dock<strong>in</strong>g programs, better results can often be obta<strong>in</strong>ed if different<br />

functions are used. More specifically, the dock<strong>in</strong>g objective function can<br />

be adapted to the dock<strong>in</strong>g algorithm used. In a parameter study, Vieth et al. 100<br />

found that by us<strong>in</strong>g a soft-core van der Waals potential their MD-based dock<strong>in</strong>g<br />

algorithm became more efficient. Us<strong>in</strong>g FlexX as the dock<strong>in</strong>g eng<strong>in</strong>e, we<br />

observed that when directed <strong>in</strong>teractions (mostly hydrogen bonds) are emphasized<br />

<strong>in</strong> the dock<strong>in</strong>g phase, library rank<strong>in</strong>g can be done successfully with the<br />

more simple, undirected PLP potential (see the prior section on Empirical Scor<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Functions) that emphasizes the general steric fit of receptor and ligand.<br />

Results are significantly worse when PLP is used for both dock<strong>in</strong>g and energy<br />

evaluation.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!