Skip to main content
Log in

Systematic assessment of scaffold distances in ChEMBL: prioritization of compound data sets for scaffold hopping analysis in virtual screening

  • Published:
Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The evaluation of the scaffold hopping potential of computational methods is of high relevance for virtual screening. For benchmark calculations, classes of known active compounds are utilized. Ideally, such classes should have a well-defined content of structurally diverse scaffolds. However, in reported benchmark investigations, the choice of activity classes is often difficult to rationalize. To provide a compendium of well-characterized test cases for the assessment of scaffold hopping potential, structural distances between scaffolds were systematically calculated for compound classes available in the ChEMBL database. Nearly seven million scaffold pairs were evaluated. On the basis of the global scaffold distance distribution, a threshold value for large scaffold distances was determined. Compound data sets were ranked based on the proportion of scaffold pairs with large distances they contained, taking additional criteria into account that are relevant for virtual screening. A set of 50 activity classes is provided that represent attractive test cases for scaffold hopping analysis and benchmark calculations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schneider G, Neidhart W, Giller T, Schmid G (1999) Angew Chem Int Ed 19:2894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Schneider G, Schneider P, Renner S (2006) QSAR Comb Sci 25:1162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Brown N, Jacoby E (2006) Mini Rev Med Chem 6:1217

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hu Y, Bajorath J (2010) Med Chem Commun 1:339

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Vogt M, Stumpfe D, Geppert H, Bajorath J (2010) J Med Chem 53:5707

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Geppert H, Vogt M, Bajorath J (2010) J Chem Inf Model 50:205

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Stumpfe D, Bajorath J (2011) In Sotriffer C (ed) Applied virtual screening: strategies, recommendations, and caveats. Methods and principles in medicinal chemistry. Virtual screening. Principles, challenges, and practical guidelines. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, p 73

  8. Hu Y, Stumpfe D, Bajorath J (2011) J Chem Inf Model 51:1742

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Li R, Stumpfe D, Vogt M, Geppert H, Bajorath J (2011) J Chem Inf Model 51:2507

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gaulton A, Bellis LJ, Bento AP, Chambers J, Davies M, Hersey A, Light Y, McGlinchey S, Michalovich D, Al-Lazikani B, Overington JP (2012) Nucleic Acids Res 40:D1100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. ChEMBL (2012) http://www.ebi.ac.uk/chembldb/

  12. Bemis GW, Murcko MA (1996) J Med Chem 39:2887

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. MACCS (2002) Structural keys. Symyx Software, San Ramon

  14. Rogers D, Hahn M (2010) J Chem Inf Model 51:742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Irwin JJ, Shoichet BK (2005) J Chem Inf Model 51:177

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jürgen Bajorath.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Li, R., Bajorath, J. Systematic assessment of scaffold distances in ChEMBL: prioritization of compound data sets for scaffold hopping analysis in virtual screening. J Comput Aided Mol Des 26, 1101–1109 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-012-9603-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-012-9603-9

Keywords

Navigation