File:Target prediction process.pdf
Original file (1,275 × 1,650 pixels, file size: 3.24 MB, MIME type: application/pdf)
Captions
Summary[edit]
DescriptionTarget prediction process.pdf |
English: Molecule 1 is used as the query molecule. Seven structurally related molecules to molecule 1 are found by similarity searching. Since the target of the query molecule (molecule 1) is unknown, information on the target, structure-activity relationship and pharmacophore are collected for the eight structurally related molecules. Then we consider the following assumptions:
Molecules 3 and 4 have the target of Y. Molecule 3 consists of a square attached to a pentagon with two double bonds, and molecule 4 consists of a triangle attached to a pentagon with two double bonds. Based on information on the structure-activity relationship of molecule 3, the double bonds on the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene) must not be reduced. Therefore, the core of these two molecules is the common and important part, named the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene). The core of molecules 3 and 4 in the presence of square and triangle is attributed to the pentagon with two double bonds. As a result, the pentagon with two double bonds has priority over the square and the triangle in expressing the target of the molecule. Molecules 5 and 7 have the target of Z. Molecule 5 consists of a square attached to a six-membered aromatic ring (benzene) and a pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene), and molecule 7 consists of a triangle attached to a five-membered aromatic ring (pyrrole) and a square. Based on information on the structure-activity relationship of molecule 7, the aromatic ring plays an important role in the activity. Therefore, the core of these two molecules is the common and important part, named the aromatic ring (the aromatic ring in molecules 5 and 7 is characterized by LigandScout with AR). There is the pentagon with two double bonds in molecules 3, 4 and 5, but the core of molecule 5 is attributed to the aromatic ring. As a result, the aromatic ring has priority over the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene) in expressing the target of the molecule. Molecules 2 and 6 have the target of X. Molecule 2 consists of a triangle attached to a square, and molecule 6 consists of a triangle attached to two squares. Because there is no molecule with the target of X having the square or the triangle alone, so the core of these two molecules is the common part, named the triangle attached to the square. The triangle attached to the square is also present in molecule 7, but the core of this molecule is attributed to the aromatic ring. As a result, the aromatic ring has priority over the triangle attached to the square in expressing the target of the molecule. Molecules 1 and 8 have an unknown target. Molecule 1 consists of a square attached to a triangle and a pentagon, and molecule 8 consists of a square attached to two triangles. There is also a triangle attached to a square (or a square attached to a triangle) in molecules 2, 6 and 7. In addition, the results showed that the aromatic ring and possibly the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene) have priority over the triangle attached to the square in expressing the target of the molecule, but molecules 1 and 8 don’t contain any of the aromatic ring or the pentagon with two double bonds. Therefore, the core of molecules 1 and 8 consists of the triangle attached to the square (cyclopropylcyclobutane) and the peripheral part does not consist the aromatic ring and the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene). As a result, the target of molecules 1 and 8 is identical to the target of their neighbor molecules, named molecules 2 and 6, and the target of the two molecules is predicted as X. Abbreviations: AR, aromatic ring; H, hydrophobic interaction; HBD, hydrogen bond donor. Reference: Forouzesh, Abed; Samadi Foroushani, Sadegh; Forouzesh, Fatemeh; Zand, Eskandar (2019). "Reliable target prediction of bioactive molecules based on chemical similarity without employing statistical methods". Frontiers in Pharmacology. 10: 835. doi:10.3389/fphar.2019.00835 |
Date | |
Source | Own work |
Author | SSamadi15 |
Licensing[edit]
- You are free:
- to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
- to remix – to adapt the work
- Under the following conditions:
- attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- share alike – If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same or compatible license as the original.
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 18:29, 27 August 2019 | 1,275 × 1,650 (3.24 MB) | SSamadi15 (talk | contribs) | User created page with UploadWizard |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage on Commons
There are no pages that use this file.
Metadata
This file contains additional information such as Exif metadata which may have been added by the digital camera, scanner, or software program used to create or digitize it. If the file has been modified from its original state, some details such as the timestamp may not fully reflect those of the original file. The timestamp is only as accurate as the clock in the camera, and it may be completely wrong.
Short title | Reliable target prediction of bioactive molecules based on chemical similarity without employing statistical methods |
---|---|
Image title | The prediction of biological targets of bioactive molecules from machine-readable materials can be routinely performed by computational target prediction tools (CTPTs). However, the prediction of biological targets of bioactive molecules from non-digital materials (e.g., printed or handwritten documents) has not been possible due to the complex nature of bioactive molecules and impossibility of employing computations. Improving the target prediction accuracy is the most important challenge for computational target prediction. A minimum structure is identified for each group of neighbor molecules in the proposed method. Each group of neighbor molecules represents a distinct structural class of molecules with the same function in relation to the target. The minimum structure is employed as a query to search for molecules that perfectly satisfy the minimum structure of what is guessed crucial for the targeted activity. The proposed method is based on chemical similarity, but only molecules that perfectly satisfy the minimum structure are considered. Structurally related bioactive molecules found with the same minimum structure were considered as neighbor molecules of the query molecule. The known target of the neighbor molecule is used as a reference for predicting the target of the neighbor molecule with an unknown target. A lot of information is needed to identify the minimum structure, because it is necessary to know which part(s) of the bioactive molecule determines the precise target or targets responsible for the observed phenotype. Therefore, the predicted target based on the minimum structure without employing the statistical significance is considered as a reliable prediction. Since only molecules that perfectly (and not partly) satisfy the minimum structure are considered, the minimum structure can be used without similarity calculations in non-digital materials and with similarity calculations (perfect similarity) in machine-readable materials. Nine tools (PASS online, PPB, SEA, TargetHunter, PharmMapper, ChemProt, HitPick, SuperPred, and SPiDER), which can be used for computational target prediction, are compared with the proposed method for 550 target predictions. The proposed method, SEA, PPB, and PASS online, showed the best quality and quantity for the accurate predictions. Figure: the process of target prediction from chemical structures based on the proposed method in a hypothetical example. Molecule 1 is used as the query molecule. Seven structurally related molecules to molecule 1 are found by similarity searching. Since the target of the query molecule (molecule 1) is unknown, information on the target, structure-activity relationship and pharmacophore are collected for the eight structurally related molecules. Then we consider the following assumptions: Molecules 3 and 4 have the target of Y. Molecule 3 consists of a square attached to a pentagon with two double bonds, and molecule 4 consists of a triangle attached to a pentagon with two double bonds. Based on information on the structure-activity relationship of molecule 3, the double bonds on the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene) must not be reduced. Therefore, the core of these two molecules is the common and important part, named the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene). The core of molecules 3 and 4 in the presence of square and triangle is attributed to the pentagon with two double bonds. As a result, the pentagon with two double bonds has priority over the square and the triangle in expressing the target of the molecule. Molecules 5 and 7 have the target of Z. Molecule 5 consists of a square attached to a six-membered aromatic ring (benzene) and a pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene), and molecule 7 consists of a triangle attached to a five-membered aromatic ring (pyrrole) and a square. Based on information on the structure-activity relationship of molecule 7, the aromatic ring plays an important role in the activity. Therefore, the core of these two molecules is the common and important part, named the aromatic ring (the aromatic ring in molecules 5 and 7 is characterized by LigandScout with AR). There is the pentagon with two double bonds in molecules 3, 4 and 5, but the core of molecule 5 is attributed to the aromatic ring. As a result, the aromatic ring has priority over the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene) in expressing the target of the molecule. Molecules 2 and 6 have the target of X. Molecule 2 consists of a triangle attached to a square, and molecule 6 consists of a triangle attached to two squares. Because there is no molecule with the target of X having the square or the triangle alone, so the core of these two molecules is the common part, named the triangle attached to the square. The triangle attached to the square is also present in molecule 7, but the core of this molecule is attributed to the aromatic ring. As a result, the aromatic ring has priority over the triangle attached to the square in expressing the target of the molecule. Molecules 1 and 8 have an unknown target. Molecule 1 consists of a square attached to a triangle and a pentagon, and molecule 8 consists of a square attached to two triangles. There is also a triangle attached to a square (or a square attached to a triangle) in molecules 2, 6 and 7. In addition, the results showed that the aromatic ring and possibly the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene) have priority over the triangle attached to the square in expressing the target of the molecule, but molecules 1 and 8 don’t contain any of the aromatic ring or the pentagon with two double bonds. Therefore, the core of molecules 1 and 8 consists of the triangle attached to the square (cyclopropylcyclobutane) and the peripheral part does not consist the aromatic ring and the pentagon with two double bonds (cyclopentadiene). As a result, the target of molecules 1 and 8 is identical to the target of their neighbor molecules, named molecules 2 and 6, and the target of the two molecules is predicted as X. Abbreviations: AR, aromatic ring; H, hydrophobic interaction; HBD, hydrogen bond donor. |
Author | Abed Forouzesh, Sadegh Samadi Foroushani, Fatemeh Forouzesh, Eskandar Zand |
Software used | Abed Forouzesh, Sadegh Samadi Foroushani |
Conversion program | Sadegh Samadi Foroushani |
Encrypted | yes (print:yes copy:yes change:no addNotes:no algorithm:AES-256) |
Page size | 612 x 792 pts (letter) |
Version of PDF format | 1.7 |