Abstract
Advancements in combinatorial chemistry and high-throughput screening technology have enabled the synthesis and screening of large molecular libraries for the purposes of drug discovery. Contrary to initial expectations, the increase in screening library size, typically combined with an emphasis on compound structural diversity, did not result in a comparable increase in the number of promising hits found. In an effort to improve the likelihood of discovering hits with greater optimization potential, more recent approaches attempt to incorporate additional knowledge to the library design process to effectively guide the search. Multi-objective optimization methods capable of taking into account several chemical and biological criteria have been used to design collections of compounds satisfying simultaneously multiple pharmaceutically relevant objectives. In this chapter, we present our efforts to implement a multi-objective optimization method, MEGALib, custom-designed to the library design problem. The method exploits existing knowledge, e.g. from previous biological screening experiments, to identify and profile molecular fragments used subsequently to design compounds compromising the various objectives.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ekins, S., Boulanger, B., Swaan, P. W., Hupcey, M. A. (2002) Towards a new age of virtual ADME/TOX and multidimensional drug discovery. J Comput Aided Mol Des 16, 381–401.
Agrafiotis, D. K., Lobanov, V. S., Salemme, F. R. (2002) Combinatorial informatics in the post-genomics era. Nat Rev Drug Discov 1, 337–346.
Baringhaus, K. –H., Matter, H. (2004) Efficient strategies for lead optimization by simultaneously addressing affinity, selectivity and pharmacokinetic parameters, in (Oprea, T., ed.) Chemoinformatics in Drug Discovery. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany, pp. 333–379.
Nicolaou, C. A., Brown, N., Pattichis, C. S. (2007) Molecular optimization using computational multi-objective methods. Curr Opin Drug Discov Dev 10, 316–324.
Soltanshahi, F., Mansley, T. E., Choi, S., Clark, R. D. (2006) Balancing focused combinatorial libraries based on multiple GPCR ligands. J Comput Aided Mol Des 20, 529–538.
Gillet, V. J., Willet, P., Fleming, P. J., Green, D. V. (2002) Designing focused libraries using MoSELECT. J Mol Graph Model 20, 491–498.
Gillet, V. J., Khatib, W., Willett, P., Fleming, P. J., Green, D. V. (2002) Combinatorial library design using a multiobjective genetic algorithm. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 42, 375–385.
Agrafiotis, D. K. (2000) Multiobjective optimization of combinatorial libraries. Mol Divers 5, 209–230.
Nicolaou, C. A., Apostolakis, J., Pattichis, C. S. (2009) De novo drug design using multi-objective evolutionary graphs. J Chem Inf Model 49, 295–307.
Coello Coello, C. A. (2002) Evolutionary multiobjective optimization: a critical review, in (Sarker, R., Mohammadian, M., Yao, X. eds.) Evolutionary Optimization. New York: Springer 48, pp. 117–146.
Yann, C., Siarry, P. (eds.) (2004) Multiobjective Optimization: Principles and Case Studies, Springer, Berlin, Germany.
Fonseca, C. M., Fleming, P. J. (1998) Multiobjective optimization and multiple constraint handling with evolutionary algorithms. I: a unified formulation. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 28, 26–37.
Zitzler, E., Thiele, L. (1999) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3, 257–271.
Gillet, V. J. (2004) Designing combinatorial libraries optimized on multiple objectives in methods in molecular biology, in (Bajorath, J., ed.) Chemoinformatics: Concepts, Methods, and Tools for Drug Discovery. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ, 275, pp. 335–354.
Gillet, V. J., Willett, P., Bradshaw, J., Green, D. V. S. (1999) Selecting combinatorial libraries to optimize diversity and physical properties. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 39, 169–177.
Zheng, W., Hung, S. T., Saunders, J. T., Seibel, G. L. (2000) PICCOLO: a tool for combinatorial library design via multicriterion optimization. Pac Symp Biocomput 5, 585–596.
Bemis, A. G. W., Murcko, M. A. (1999) Designing libraries with CNS activity. J Med Chem 42, 4942–4951.
Wright, T., Gillet, V. J., Green, D. V., Pickett, S. D. (2003) Optimizing the size and configuration of combinatorial libraries. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 43, 381–390.
Noesis Chemoinformatics, Ltd. http://www.noesisinformatics.com (accessed August 12, 2009).
MoDest. http://www.chil2.de (accessed June 30, 2009).
OpenEye, Inc. http://www.eyesopen.com (accessed July 3, 2009).
Nicolaou, C. A., Pattichis, C. S. (2006) Molecular substructure mining approaches for computer-aided drug discovery: a review. Proceedings of the 2006 ITAB Conference, October 26–28, Ioannina, Greece.
Lewell, X. O., Budd, D. B., Watson, S. P., Hann, M. M. (1998) RECAP – Retrosynthetic Combinatorial Analysis Procedure: a powerful new technique for identifying privileged molecular fragments with useful applications in combinatorial chemistry. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 38, 511–522.
Barone R., Chanon, M. (2001) A new and simple approach to chemical complexity. Application to the synthesis of natural products. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 41, 269–272.
Angelis, M. D., Stossi F., Waibel M., Katzenellenbogen, B. S., Katzenellenbogen, J. A. (2005) Isocoumarins as estrogen receptor beta selective ligands: isomers of isoflavone phytoestrogens and their metabolites. Bioorg Med Chem 13, 6529–6542.
Wheeler, D. L., et al. (2006) Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nucleic Acids Res 34, 173–180.
Wild, D. J., Blankley, C. J. (2000) Comparison of 2D fingerprint types and hierarchy level selection methods for structural grouping using wards clustering. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 40, 155–162.
Kearsley, S. K., Sallamack, S., Fluder, E. M., Andose, J. D., Mosley, R. T., Sheridan, R. P. (1996) Chemical similarity using physiochemical property descriptors. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 36, 118–127.
Tietze, S., Apostolakis, J. (2007) GlamDock: development and validation of a new docking tool on several thousand protein-ligand complexes. J Chem Inf Model 47, 1657–1672.
Willet, P., Barnard, J. M., Downs, G. M. (1998) Chemical similarity searching. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 39, 983–996.
Lipinski, C. A., Lombardo, F., Dominy, B. W., Feeney, P. J. (1997) Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability. Drug discovery and development settings. Adv Drug Discovery Rev 23, 3–25.
Prien, O. (2005) Target-family-oriented focused libraries for kinases – conceptual design aspects and commercial availability. ChemBioChem 6, 500–505.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Science+Business Media, LLC
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Nicolaou, C.A., Kannas, C.C. (2011). Molecular Library Design Using Multi-Objective Optimization Methods. In: Zhou, J. (eds) Chemical Library Design. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 685. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-931-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-931-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press
Print ISBN: 978-1-60761-930-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-60761-931-4
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols