In Silico methods for the study of the interactions between drugs and their protein targets
Abstract
In silico methods are a set of theoretical computer tools that analyze and correlate a series of physical, chemical and mathematical parameters with the purpose of studying the behavior of drugs and their protein therapeutic targets. These studies relate experimental data and theoretical data of interactions. drug-protein based on molecular descriptors. Among these methods, the most relevant are molecular docking, which relates the molecular dynamics between drug-protein structures, and the structure-activity relationship or QSAR method, which correlates physicochemical, electronic, and steric parameters of drugs with their biological activity. The mathematical results obtained through these methods allow generating a series of predictions of theoretical-experimental relationship.
Downloads
References
Mihasan M.. What in silico molecular docking can do for the banch-working biologist. J. Biosci 2012; 37: 1089-95.
Kontoyianni M. Docking and Virtual Screaning in Drug Discovery. MMBiolgy 2017; 1647: 255–65.
Choi J, Lee J. V-Dock: Fast Generation of Novel Drug-like Molecules Using Machine-Learning-Based Docking Score and Molecular Optimitation. Int. J. Mol. Sci 2021; 11635(22): 1-18.
Batool M, Ahmad B, Choi S. A Structure-Based Drug Discovery Paradigm. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019; 2783(20): 1-18.
Wang T, Wu Main-Bin, Chen Zheng-Jie, Chen H, Lin Jian-Ping, Yang Li-Rong. Fragment-Based Drug Discovery and Molecular Docking in Drug Desing. CPhBio. 2015; 16(1): 11–25.
Yuriev E, Holien J, Ramsland P A. Improvements, trends, and new ideas in molecular docking: 2012-2013 in review. J. Mol. Recognit, 2015; 28: 581-04.
Yan Y, Zhang D, Zhou P, Li B, Huang Sheng-You. HDOCK: a web server for protein-protein and protein-DNA/RNA docking based on hybrid strategy.Nucleic Acid Research. 2017; 45: 365–73.
Schweiker S S, Levonis S M. Navigating the intricacies of molecular docking. Future Med. Chem. 2020: 1-4.
Dallakyan S, Olson A J. Small-Molecule Library Screeaning by Docking with PyRx. Chem Biology. 2015; 1263: 243–51.
Menin S, Pavan M, Salmaso V, Sturlese M, Moro S. Thermal Titration Molecular Dynamics (TTMD): Not Your Usual Post-Docking Refinement. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023; 3596(24): 1–22.
Tingle B I, Irwin J J. Large-Scale Docking in the Cloud J. Chem. Int Model. 2023; 63: 2735-41.
Potemkin V, Grishina M. Principles for 3D/4D QSAR classification of drugs. Drug Discovery Today. 2008;13(21-22): 952-60.
Bahia M S, Kaspi O, Touitou M, Binayev I, Dhail S, Spiegel S et al. A comparison between 2D and 3D descriptors in QSAR modeling based on bio-active conformations. Mol. Inf. 2023;42: 1-12.
Nikonenko A, Zankov D, Baskin I, Madzhidov T, Polishchuk P. Multiple Conformer Descriptors for QSAR Modeling. Mol Inf. 2021;40: 1-12.
Clark R D. Prospective Ligand and Target-Based 3D QSAR: State of the Art 2008. Current Topics in Med. Chem. 2009;9(9): 791-311.
Wilkes J, Stoyanova-Slovova I, Buzatu D. Alignment-independent technique for 3D QSAR analysis. J. Compur Aided Mol.Des. 2016;30: 331-45.
Cramer R, Wendt B. Pushingthe boundaries of 3D QSAR. Compur Aided Mol.Des. 2007; 21: 23-32.
Wang Yu-Liang, Wang F, Shi Xing-Xing, Jia Chen-Yang, Wu Feng-Xu, Hao Ge-Fei, et al. Cloud 3D-QSAR: a web tool for the development of quantitative structure-activity relationship models in drug discovery. Briefings in Bioinformatics. 2021; 22(4): 1-8.
Myint K Z, Xie Xiang-Qun. Recent Advances in Fragment-Based QSAR and Multi-Dimensional QSAR Methods. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010; 11: 3846-67.
Cramer R D. Rethinking 3D QSAR. J. Comput Aided Mol. Des. 2011; 25: 197-201.
Bak A. Two Decades of 4D-QSAR: A Dying Art or Staging a Comback?. Int. J. Mol.Sci. 2021; 5212(22): 1-23.
Doweyko A M. 3D-QSAR illusions. J. Compur Aided Mol.Des.2004; 18: 587-96.
Copyright (c) 2024 Ricardo G. Martinez Daniel
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
