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.

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

Ranks of known <strong>in</strong>hibitors<br />

2H-bonds 1H-bond 2H-bonds 1H-bond<br />

PLP score FlexX score<br />

Figure 4 Results of a seed<strong>in</strong>g experiment. The ranks of known p38 MAP k<strong>in</strong>ase<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitors are shown as horizontal l<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> the four diagrams. Inhibitors have been<br />

divided <strong>in</strong>to two classes: those form<strong>in</strong>g one or two hydrogen bonds to the p38 MAP<br />

k<strong>in</strong>ase ATP b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g site. The FlexX scor<strong>in</strong>g function preferentially enriches those<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitors that form two hydrogen bonds. This tendency is less pronounced for the PLP<br />

scor<strong>in</strong>g function. The <strong>in</strong>hibitors with the best predicted aff<strong>in</strong>ities are at the top. Data is<br />

shown for the top 300 compounds <strong>in</strong> terms of dock<strong>in</strong>g scores.<br />

generated by FlexX 64–66 us<strong>in</strong>g the FlexX scor<strong>in</strong>g function. These alternative<br />

solutions were rescored separately by the FlexX and PLP 62 scor<strong>in</strong>g functions<br />

to select the lowest energy dock<strong>in</strong>g solution per compound. The compounds <strong>in</strong><br />

the database were then ranked accord<strong>in</strong>g to these scores. Figure 4 shows the<br />

ranks of the known <strong>in</strong>hibitors among the top 350 compounds as calculated by<br />

both scor<strong>in</strong>g functions. Although the overall performance of both scor<strong>in</strong>g<br />

functions <strong>in</strong> enrich<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>hibitors is comparable, it is obvious that the FlexX<br />

score ‘‘specializes’’ on the doubly hydrogen-bonded <strong>in</strong>hibitors. On the other<br />

hand, if one were to select screen<strong>in</strong>g candidates from the PLP list, one would<br />

most likely select both types of <strong>in</strong>hibitors.<br />

The PLP function generally emphasizes steric complementarity and<br />

hydrophobic <strong>in</strong>teractions with its more far-reach<strong>in</strong>g pair potential, whereas<br />

the FlexX score emphasizes hydrogen-bond complementarity. A comb<strong>in</strong>ation<br />

of PLP and FlexX scor<strong>in</strong>g functions called ScreenScore was published<br />

recently. 78 It was derived by perform<strong>in</strong>g a systematic optimization of library<br />

rank<strong>in</strong>g results over seven targets, whose receptor sites cover a wide range of<br />

form, size, and polarity. ScreenScore was designed to be a robust and general<br />

scor<strong>in</strong>g function that comb<strong>in</strong>es the virtues of both PLP and FlexX. Figure 5<br />

shows that this is <strong>in</strong>deed the case. ScreenScore gives good enrichment values<br />

for cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2 has a highly lipophilic b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g site), and neuram<strong>in</strong>idase<br />

(which has a highly polar site), whereas the <strong>in</strong>dividual functions fail<br />

<strong>in</strong> one of the two cases. The authors of PLP have recently enhanced their<br />

0<br />

100<br />

200<br />

300

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!