Abstract
QSAR/QSPR analysis started with different classical approaches constituting the core concept of predictive modeling analysis in the context of structure–activity relationships. Such classical techniques have been based on various postulates and hypotheses. With the passage of time, various dimensional features have taken an important role in diagnosis of chemical information and thereby in the development of successful QSAR/QSPR models. Development of computer technology has provided an essential support for easy and accurate implementation of complex molecular modeling calculations and data generation. The present chapter provides an account of the classical QSAR/QSPR approaches along with glimpses of two- and three-dimensional QSAR/QSPR techniques. The impact of the usage of computer and computational chemistry techniques in the paradigm of QSAR/QSPR has also been discussed.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Free SM, Wilson JW (1964) A mathematical contribution to structure-activity studies. J Med Chem 7:395–399
Beasley JG, Purcell WP (1969) An example of successful prediction of cholinesterase inhibitory potency from regression analysis. Biochim Biophys Acta 178:175–176
Purcell WP, Bass GE, Clayton JM (1973) Strategy of drug design: a guide to biological activity. Wiley, New York
Fujita T, Ban T (1971) Structure-activity study of phenethylamines as substrates of biosynthetic enzymes of sympathetic transmitters. J Med Chem 14:148–152
Hammett LP (1935) Some relations between reaction rates and equilibrium constants. Chem Rev 17:125–136
Hansch C, Fujita T (1964) ρ-σ-π Analysis. A method for the correlation of biological activity and chemical structure. J Am Chem Soc 86:1616–1626
Kubinyi H (1993) QSAR: Hansch analysis and related approaches. In: Mannhold R, Krogsgaard-Larsen P, Timmerman H (eds) Methods and principles in medicinal chemistry. VCH, Weinheim
Balaban AT (1985) Applications of graph theory in chemistry. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 25:334–343
Trinajstić N, Gutman I (2002) Mathematical Chemistry. Croat Chem Acta 75:329–356
Roy K (2004) Topological descriptors in drug design and modeling studies. Mol Diver 8:321–323
Todeschini R, Consonn V (2009) Molecular descriptors for chemoinformatics. Wiley-VCH, New York
Kier LB, Hall LH (1986) Molecular connectivity in structure-activity analysis. Wiley, New York
Basak SC, Gute BD, Grunwald GD (1997) Use of topostructural, topochemical, and geometric parameters in the prediction of vapor pressure: a hierarchical QSAR approach. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 37:651–655
Stankevich IV, Skovortsova MI, Zefirov NS (1995) On a quantum chemical interpretation of molecular connectivity indices for conjugated hydrocarbons. J Mol Struct (Theochem) 342:173–179
Gálvez J (1998) On a topological interpretation of electronic and vibrational molecular energies. J Mol Struct (Theochem) 429:255–264
Mazzanti A, Casarini D (2012) Recent trends in conformational analysis. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 2:613–641
Hendrickson JB (1961) Molecular geometry. I. Machine computation of the common rings. J Am Chem Soc 83:4537–4547
Allinger NL (1977) Conformational analysis. 130. MM2. A hydrocarbon force field utilizing V1 and V2 torsional terms. J Am Chem Soc 99:8127–8134
Petrenko R, Jaroszaw M (2010) Molecular dynamics. Encyclopedia of life sciences (ELS). Wiley, Chichester
Schrödinger E (1926) Quantisierung als Eigenwertproblem (Erste Mitteilung). Ann Phys 79:361–376
Born M, Oppenheimer R (1927) Zur quantentheorie der molekeln. Ann Phys 389:457–484
Hartree DR (1928) The wave mechanics of an atom with a non-Coulomb central field. I. Theory and methods. Proc Cambridge Philos Soc 24:89–110
Fock V (1930) Näherungsmethode zur Lösung des Quantenmechanischen Mehrkörperproblems. Z Phys 61:126–148
Jones RO, Gunnarsson O (1989) The density functional formalism, its applications and prospects. Rev Mod Phys 61:689–746
Thiel W (2014) Semiempirical quantum–chemical methods. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 4:145–157
Pople JA, Santry DP, Segal GA (1965) Approximate self consistent molecular orbital theory. I. Invariant procedures. J Chem Phys 43:S129–S135
Cramer RD III, Patterson DE, Bunce JD (1988) Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). I. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J Am Chem Soc 110:5959–5967
Norinder U (1998) Recent progress in CoMFA methodology and related techniques. In: Kubinyi H, Folkers G, Martin YC (eds) 3D QSAR in drug design—recent advances, vol 3. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, pp 24–39
Klebe G, Abraham U, Mietzner T (1994) Molecular similarity indices in a comparative analysis (CoMSIA) of drug molecules to correlate and predict their biological activity. J Med Chem 37:4130–4146
Hopfinger AJ, Tokarski JS (1997) Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis. In: Charifson PS (ed) Practical application of computer-aided drug design. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, pp 105–164
Hahn M (1995) Receptor surface models. 1. Definition and construction. J Med Chem 38(12):2080–2090
Verma J, Khedkar VM, Coutinho EC (2010) 3D-QSAR in drug design—a review. Curr Top Med Chem 10(1):95–115
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Roy, K., Kar, S., Das, R.N. (2015). QSAR/QSPR Methods. In: A Primer on QSAR/QSPR Modeling. SpringerBriefs in Molecular Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17281-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17281-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17280-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17281-1
eBook Packages: Chemistry and Materials ScienceChemistry and Material Science (R0)