Search

Being in the center of both therapeutic and toxicological concerns, NRs are widely studied for drug discovery application but also to unravel the potential toxicity of environmental compounds such as pesticides, cosmetics or additives. High throughput screening campaigns (HTS) are largely used to detect compounds able to interact with this protein family for both therapeutic and toxicological purposes. These methods lead to a large amount of data requiring the use of computational approaches for a robust and correct analysis and interpretation. The output data can be used to build predictive models to forecast the behavior of new chemicals based on their

The estrogen receptors α (ERα) are transcription factors involved in several physiological processes belonging to the nuclear receptors (NRs) protein family. Besides the endogenous ligands, several other chemicals are able to bind to those receptors. Among them are endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that can trigger toxicological pathways. Many studies have focused on predicting EDCs based on their ability to bind NRs, mainly, estrogen receptors (ER), thyroid hormones receptors (TR), androgen receptors (AR), glucocorticoid receptors (GR), and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors gamma (PPARγ). In this work, we suggest a pipeline designed for the prediction of ERα binding activity. The flagged compounds can be further explored using experimental techniques to assess their potential to be EDCs. The pipeline is a combination of structure based (docking and pharmacophore models) and ligand based (pharmacophore models) methods. The models have been constructed using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data encompassing a large number of structurally diverse compounds. A validation step was then achieved using two external databases: the NR-DBIND (Nuclear Receptors DataBase Including Negative Data) and the EADB (Estrogenic Activity DataBase). Different combination protocols were explored. Results showed that the combination of models performed better than each model taken individually. The consensus protocol that reached values of 0.81 and 0.54 for sensitivity and specificity, respectively, was the best suited for our toxicological study. Insights and recommendations were drawn to alleviate the screening quality of other projects focusing on ERα binding predictions.

The Drug Design Data Resource (D3R) Grand Challenges are blind contests organized to assess the state-of-the-art methods accuracy in predicting binding modes and relative binding free energies of experimentally validated ligands for a given target. The second stage of the D3R Grand Challenge 2 (GC2) was focused on ranking 102 compounds according to their predicted affinity for Farnesoid X Receptor. In this task, our workflow was ranked 5th out of the 77 submissions in the structure-based category. Our strategy consisted in (1) a combination of molecular docking using AutoDock 4.2 and manual edition of available structures for binding poses generation using SeeSAR, (2) the use of HYDE scoring for pose selection, and (3) a hierarchical ranking using HYDE and MM/GBSA. In this report, we detail our pose generation and ligands ranking protocols and provide guidelines to be used in a prospective computer aided drug design program.

International audience; The androgen receptor (AR) is a transcription factor that plays a key role in sexual phenotype and neuromuscular development. AR can be modulated by exogenous compounds such as pharmaceuticals or chemicals present in the environment, and particularly by AR agonist compounds that mimic the action of endogenous agonist ligands and whether restore or alter the AR endocrine system functions. The activation of AR must be correctly balanced and identifying potent AR agonist compounds is of high interest to both propose treatments for certain diseases, or to predict the risk related to agonist chemicals exposure. The development of in silico approaches and the publication of structural, affinity and activity data provide a good framework to develop rational AR hits prediction models. Herein, we present a docking and a pharmacophore modeling strategy to help identifying AR agonist compounds. All models were trained on the NR-DBIND that provides high quality binding data on AR and tested on AR-agonist activity assays from the Tox21 initiative. Both methods display high performance on the NR-DBIND set and could serve as starting point for biologists and toxicologists. Yet, the pharmacophore models still need data feeding to be used as large scope undesired effect prediction models.

Nuclear receptors (NRs) are transcription factors that regulate gene expression in various physiological processes through their interactions with small hydrophobic molecules. They constitute an important class of targets for drugs and endocrine disruptors and are widely studied for both health and environment concerns. Since the integration of negative data can be critical for accurate modeling of ligand activity profiles, we manually collected and annotated NRs interaction data (positive and negative) through a sharp review of the corresponding literature. 15 116 positive and negative interactions data are provided for 28 NRs together with 593 PDB structures in the freely available Nuclear Receptors Database Including Negative Data ( http://nr-dbind.drugdesign.fr ). The NR-DBIND contains the most extensive information about interaction data on NRs, which should bring valuable information to chemists, biologists, pharmacologists and toxicologists.

Neuropilin-1/-2 (+33 NRPs), VEGF-A 165 co-receptors , are over-expressed during cancer progression. Thus, NRPs targeted drug development is challenged using a multistep in silico/in vitro screening procedure. The first fully non-peptidic VEGF-A 165 /NRPs protein–protein interaction antagonist (IC 50 = 34 μM) without effect on pro-angiogenic kinases has been identified (compound-1). This hit showed breast cancer cells anti-proliferative activity (IC 50 = 0.60 μM). Compound-1 treated NOG-xenografted mice significantly exerted tumor growth inhibition, which is correlated with Ki-67 low expression and apoptosis. Furthermore, CD31 + /CD34 + vessels are reduced in accordance with HUVEC-tube formation inhibition (IC 50 = 0.20 μM). Taking together, compound-1 is the first fully organic inhibitor targeting NRPs.

Structure based virtual ligand screening (SBVLS) methods are widely used in drug discovery programs. When several structures of the target are available, protocols based either on single structure docking or on ensemble docking can be used. The performance of the methods depends on the structure(s) used as a reference, whose choice requires retrospective enrichment studies on benchmarking databases which consume additional resources. In the present study, we have identified several trends in the properties of the binding sites of the structures that led to the optimal performance in retrospective SBVLS tests whatever the docking program used (Surflex-dock or ICM). By assessing their hydrophobicity and comparing their volume and opening, we show that the selection of optimal structures should be possible with no requirement of prior retrospective enrichment studies. If the mean binding site volume is lower than 350 A(3), the structure with the smaller volume should be preferred. In the other cases, the structure with the largest binding site should be preferred. These optimal structures may be either selected for a single structure docking strategy or an ensemble docking strategy. When constructing an ensemble, the opening of the site might be an interesting criterion additionaly to its volume as the most closed structures should not be preferred in the large systems. These "binding site properties-based" guidelines could be helpful to optimize future prospective drug discovery protocols when several structures of the target are available.

Virtual screening methods are commonly used nowadays in drug discovery processes. However, to ensure their reliability, they have to be carefully evaluated. The evaluation of these methods is often realized in a retrospective way, notably by studying the enrichment of benchmarking data sets. To this purpose, numerous benchmarking data sets were developed over the years, and the resulting improvements led to the availability of high quality benchmarking data sets. However, some points still have to be considered in the selection of the active compounds, decoys, and protein structures to obtain optimal benchmarking data sets.

A protocol was devised in which FRED, DOCK, and Surflex were combined in a multistep virtual ligand screening (VLS) procedure to screen the pocket of four different proteins. One goal was to evaluate the impact of chaining "freely available packages to academic users" on docking/scoring accuracy and CPU time consumption. A bank of 65 660 compounds including 49 known actives was generated. Our procedure is successful because docking/scoring parameters are tuned according to the nature of the binding pocket and because a shape-based filtering tool is applied prior to flexible docking. The obtained enrichment factors are in line with those reported in recent studies. We suggest that consensus docking/scoring could be valuable to some drug discovery projects. The present protocol could process the entire bank for one receptor in less than a week on one processor, suggesting that VLS experiments could be performed even without large computer resources.

The evaluation of virtual ligand screening methods is of major importance to ensure their reliability. Taking into account the agonist/antagonist pharmacological profile should improve the quality of the benchmarking data sets since ligand binding can induce conformational changes in the nuclear receptor structure and such changes may vary according to the agonist/antagonist ligand profile. We indeed found that splitting the agonist and antagonist ligands into two separate data sets for a given nuclear receptor target significantly enhances the quality of the evaluation. The pharmacological profile of the ligand bound in the binding site of the target structure was also found to be an additional critical parameter. We also illustrate that active compound data sets for a given pharmacological activity can be used as a set of experimentally validated decoy ligands for another pharmacological activity to ensure a reliable and challenging evaluation of virtual screening methods.

Nuclear receptors (NRs) constitute an important class of drug targets. We created the most exhaustive NR-focused benchmarking database to date, the NRLiSt BDB (NRs ligands and structures benchmarking database). The 9905 compounds and 339 structures of the NRLiSt BDB are ready for structure-based and ligand-based virtual screening. In the present study, we detail the protocol used to generate the NRLiSt BDB and its features. We also give some examples of the errors that we found in ChEMBL that convinced us to manually review all original papers. Since extensive and manually curated experimental data about NR ligands and structures are provided in the NRLiSt BDB, it should become a powerful tool to assess the performance of virtual screening methods on NRs, to assist the understanding of NR's function and modulation, and to support the discovery of new drugs targeting NRs. NRLiSt BDB is freely available online at http://nrlist.drugdesign.fr .

In the early stage of drug discovery programs, when the structure of a complex involving a target and a small molecule is available, structure-based virtual ligand screening methods are generally preferred. However, ligand-based strategies like shape-similarity search methods can also be applied. Shape-similarity search methods consist in exploring a pseudo-binding-site derived from the known small molecule used as a reference. Several of these methods use conformational sampling algorithms which are also shared by corresponding docking methods: for example Surflex-dock/Surflex-sim, FlexX/FlexS, ICM, and OMEGA-FRED/OMEGA-ROCS. Using 11 systems issued from the challenging "own" subsets of the Directory of Useful Decoys (DUD-own), we evaluated and compared the performance of the above-cited programs in terms of molecular alignment accuracy, enrichment in active compounds, and enrichment in different chemotypes (scaffold-hopping). Since molecular alignment is a crucial aspect of performance for the different methods, we have assessed its impact on enrichment. We have also illustrated the paradox of retrieving active compounds with good scores even if they are inaccurately positioned. Finally, we have highlighted possible positive aspects of using shape-based approaches in drug-discovery protocols when the structure of the target in complex with a small molecule is known.

In today's research environment, a wealth of experimental/theoretical structural data is available and the number of therapeutically relevant macromolecular structures is growing rapidly. This, coupled with the huge number of small non-peptide potential drug candidates easily available (over 7 million compounds), highlight the need of using computer-aided techniques for the efficient identification and optimization of novel hit compounds. Virtual (or in silico) ligand screening based on the three-dimensional structure of macromolecular targets (SB-VLS) is firmly established as an important approach to identify chemical entities that have a high likelihood of binding to a target molecule to elicit desired biological responses. A myriad of free applications and services facilitating the drug discovery process have been posted on the Web. In this review, we cite over 350 URLs that are useful for SB-VLS projects and essentially free for academic groups. We attempt to provide links for in silico ADME/tox prediction tools, compound collections, some ligand-based methods, characterization/simulation of 3D targets and homology modeling tools, druggable pocket predictions, active site comparisons, analysis of macromolecular interfaces, protein docking tools to help identify binding pockets and protein-ligand docking/scoring methods. As such, we aim at providing both, methods pertaining to the field of Structural Bioinformatics (defined here as tools to study macromolecules) and methods pertaining to the field of Chemoinformatics (defined here as tools to make better decisions faster in the arena of drug/lead identification and optimization). We also report several recent success stories using these free computer methods. This review should help readers finding free computer tools useful for their projects. Overall, we are confident that these tools will facilitate rapid and cost-effective identification of new hit compounds. The URLs presented in this review will be updated regularly at www.vls3d.com in the coming months, "Links" section.