4.4 Article

Development of predictive pharmacophore model for in silico screening, and 3D QSAR CoMFA and CoMSIA studies for lead optimization, for designing of potent tumor necrosis factor alpha converting enzyme inhibitors

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN
卷 24, 期 2, 页码 143-156

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10822-010-9322-z

关键词

Pharmacophore model; In-silico screening; 3D-QSAR; TACE inhibitors

资金

  1. All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi, India [8023/BOR/RID/RPS-148/2007-08]
  2. A. I. C. T. E, New Delhi, India [1-10/FD/NDF-PG/(41)/2006-07]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A chemical feature-based pharmacophore model was developed for Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha converting enzyme (TACE) inhibitors. A five point pharmacophore model having two hydrogen bond acceptors (A), one hydrogen bond donor (D) and two aromatic rings (R) with discrete geometries as pharmacophoric features was developed. The pharmacophore model so generated was then utilized for in silico screening of a database. The pharmacophore model so developed was validated by using four compounds having proven TACE inhibitory activity which were grafted into the database. These compounds mapped well onto the five listed pharmacophoric features. This validated pharmacophore model was also used for alignment of molecules in CoMFA and CoMSIA analysis. The contour maps of the CoMFA/CoMSIA models were utilized to provide structural insight for activity improvement of potential novel TACE inhibitors. The pharmacophore model so developed could be used for in silico screening of any commercial/in house database for identification of TACE inhibiting lead compounds, and the leads so identified could be optimized using the developed CoMSIA model. The present work highlights the tremendous potential of the two mutually complementary ligand-based drug designing techniques (i.e. pharmacophore mapping and 3D-QSAR analysis) using TACE inhibitors as prototype biologically active molecules.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据