February 14, 2006 Guha Jayachandran (guha@stanford.edu), CS379A - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

february 14 2006
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

February 14, 2006 Guha Jayachandran (guha@stanford.edu), CS379A - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1. Miscellaneous 2. Case Studies 3. De novo Small Molecule Design February 14, 2006 Guha Jayachandran (guha@stanford.edu), CS379A Pareto Optimality From Schneider and Fechner (NRD 2005) Case Studies n Topic n Anything related to


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Guha Jayachandran (guha@stanford.edu), CS379A

February 14, 2006

  • 1. Miscellaneous
  • 2. Case Studies
  • 3. De novo Small Molecule Design
slide-2
SLIDE 2

Pareto Optimality

From Schneider and Fechner (NRD 2005)

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Case Studies

n Topic

n Anything related to computational drug discovery

(protease docking, example of focused libraries construction, new grid architectures, etc.)

n Journal article fine. If white paper or something like

that, just check with me.

n Emphasize applications over methods n If you want to do something different (like research

proposal), let me know

n Present what was done, what techniques were

used, and what you think

n Quick: 5 minute presentation (March 14) n More detailed: ~1 page written (due by March 23)

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Guha Jayachandran (guha@stanford.edu), CS379A

De novo Small Molecule Design

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Paradigms

n Luck

n Go out, collect samples, see if

anything works

n Asprin and penicillin examples

n Screening

n Experimental vs. virtual n Various computational techniques n Can’t screen everything

n Design

Penicillin

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Uses of Design

n Goal

n Ligand that binds to receptor and can be

synthesized (synthetic accessibility has been a big challenge)

n Maybe other goals like ADME (so

multidimensional optimization)

n Motivation

n Lead generation for screening n Novel compounds and scaffold hopping n Give new ideas to chemists

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Choices

n Information input

n Receptor based (need structure of receptor) or

ligand based (use known ligands)

n Scoring function

n Force field, knowledge based, empirical,

similarity

n Structure assembly method n Structure search algorithm

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Example Construction Methods

From Schneider and Fechner (NRD 2005)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

TOPAS Remaking Imanitib

From Schneider and Fechner (NRD 2005)

50 generations to Gleevec Substitute fragments (so synthetically accessible)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Synthetic Accessibility

n Has been big problem in de novo design

n A virtually ligand isn’t very useful if it can’t be

made real

n One approach: build in what reactions are

possible

n Use parts of known ligands (like in

BREED)

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Example Programs

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Readings

n

Combinatorial computational method gives new picomolar ligands for a known enzyme (Grzybowski, et. al.)

n

BREED: Generating Novel Inhibitors through Hybridization of Known

  • Ligands. Application to CDK2, P38, and HIV Protease (Pierce, Road, and

Bemis)

n

CONCERTS: Dynamic Connection of Fragments as an Approach to de Novo Ligand Design (Pearlman and Murcko)

n

A genetic algorithm for structure-based de novo design (Pegg, Haresco, and Kuntz)