4.4 Article

3D-QSAR and molecular modeling of HIV-1 integrase inhibitors

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN
卷 16, 期 3, 页码 181-200

出版社

KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBL
DOI: 10.1023/A:1020137802155

关键词

comparative molecular field analysis; comparative molecular similarity indices analysis; docking; HIV-1 integrase; partial least squares

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D QSAR) methods were applied on a series of inhibitors of HIV-1 integrase with respect to their inhibition of 3'-processing and 3'-end joining steps in vitro. The training set consisted of 27 compounds belonging to the class of thiazolothiazepines. The predictive ability of each model was evaluated using test set I consisting of four thiazolothiazepines and test set II comprised of seven compounds belonging to an entirely different structural class of coumarins. Maximum Common Substructure (MCS) based method was used to align the molecules and this was compared with other known methods of alignment. Two methods of 3D QSAR: comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA) and comparative molecular similarity indices analysis (CoMSIA) were analyzed in terms of their predictive abilities. CoMSIA produced significantly better results for all correlations. The results indicate a strong correlation between the inhibitory activity of these compounds and the steric and electrostatic fields around them. CoMSIA models with considerable internal as well as external predictive ability were obtained. A poor correlation obtained with hydrophobic field indicates that the binding of thiazolothiazepines to HIV-1 integrase is mainly enthalpic in nature. Further the most active compound of the series was docked into the active site using the crystal structure of integrase. The binding site was formed by the amino acid residues 64-67, 116, 148, 151-152, 155-156, and 159. The comparison of coefficient contour maps with the steric and electrostatic properties of the receptor shows high level of compatibility.

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