Abstract
With the advent of high-throughput technologies in drug discovery, combinatorial chemistry has superseded natural products as the prime source of compounds to be tested in biological screening (1). The reason being that compared with classical synthesis, high-throughput chemistry can produce a much larger number of compounds within a much shorter period of time. However, owing to the combinatorial nature of the problem and the large number of reagents available, many more compounds are theoretically accessible via a given synthetic route than it is actually feasible to synthesize. Therefore, library design techniques are employed to identify those reagents that yield a library enriched with the desired properties. Early on, most applications of these techniques concentrated on designing very diverse libraries, with the idea that these libraries would be tested against a variety of biological assays. The ideal library in this case would be with no voids, no redundancy, and an even distribution with regard to a given chemical space. Nowadays, it is equally common to design targeted libraries to have a maximal activity in a selected assay. Here, all compounds would be designed to be similar to given hits or leads. Other applications of library design techniques include the computational evaluation of templates, i.e., prioritization of candidate libraries for synthesis and screening (see Note 1).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Gibbon J. A., Taylor E. W., and Braeckman R. A. (1998) in Combinatorial chemistry and molecular diversity in drug discovery, (Gordon E. M. and Kerwin J. F., eds.), Wiley-Liss New York, NY, pp. 453–474.
Martin E. J. and Critchlow R. E. (1999) Beyond mere diversity: Tailoring combinatorial libraries for drug discovery. J. Combinat. Chem. 1, 32–45.
Gorse D. and Lahana R. (2000) Functional diversity of compound libraries. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 4, 287–294.
Walters W.P, Stahl M. T., and Murcko M. A. (1998) Virtual screening—an overview. Drug Discov. Today 3, 160–178.
Leach A. R. and Hann M. M. (2000) The in silico world of virtual libraries. Drug Discov. Today 5, 326–336.
Good A. C. and Lewis R. A. (1997) New methodology for profiling combinatorial libraries and screening sets: cleaning up the design process with HARPick. J. Med. Chem. 40, 3926–3936.
Van Drie J. H. and Lajiness M. S. (1998) Approaches to virtual library design. Drug Discov. Today 3, 274–283.
Linusson A., Gottfries J., Lindgren F., and Wold S. (2000) Statistical molecular design of building blocks for combinatorial chemistry. J. Med. Chem. 43,1320–1328.
Gillet V. J., Willet P., and Bradshaw J. (1997) The effectiveness of reactant pools for generation of structurally diverse combinatorial libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 37, 731–740.
Jamois E. A., Hassan M., and Waldman M. (2000) Evaluation of reagent-based and product-based strategies in the design of combinatorial library subsets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 40, 63–70.
Gillet V. J., Willet P., Bradshaw J., and Green D. V. S. (1999) Selecting combinatorial libraries to optimize diversity and physical properties. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39, 169–177.
Pearlman R. S. and Smith K. M. (1998) Novel software tools for chemical diversity. Perspect. Drug Discov. Design. 9, 339–353.
Pearlman R. S. and Smith K. M. (1999) Metric validation and the receptorrelevant subspace concept. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39, 28–35.
Cramer R. D., Patterson D. E., Clark R. D., Soltanshahi F., and Lawless M. S. (1998) Virtual compound libraries: A new approach to decision making in molecular discovery research. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 38, 1010–1023.
Rishton G. M. (1997) Reactive compounds and in vitro false positives in HTS. Drug Discov. Today 2, 382–384.
Lewis R. A., Mason J. S., and McLay I. M. (1997) Similarity measures for rational set selection and analysis of compbinatorial libraries: the diverse property-derived (DPD) approach. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 37, 599–614.
Hann M., Hudson B., Lewell X., Lifely R., Miller L., and Ramsden N. (1999)Strategic pooling of compounds for high-throughput screening. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39, 897–902.
Clark D. E. and Pickett S. D. (2000) Computational methods for the prediction of “drug-likeness.” Drug Discov. Today 5, 49–58.
Lipinski C. A., Lombardo F., Dominy B. W., and Feeney P. J. (1997) Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 23, 3–25.
Patterson D. E., Cramer R. D., Ferguson A. M., Clark R. D., and Weinberger L. E. (1996) Neighborhood behavior: A useful concept for validation of “molecular diversity” descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 39, 3049–3059.
Johnson M. A. and Maggiora G. M. (1990) Concepts and applications of molecular similarity, Wiley New York.
Mason J. S., Morize I., Menard P. R., Cheney D. L., Hulme C., and Labaudiniere R. F. (1999) New 4-point pharmacophore method for molecular similarity and diversity applications: overview of the method and applications, including a novel approach to the design of combinatorial libraries containing priviledged substructures. J. Med. Chem. 42, 3251–3264.
Picket S. D., Mason J. S., and McLay I. M. (1996) Diversity profiling and design using 3D pharmacophores: pharmacophore-derived queries (PDQ). J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 36, 1214–1223.
Drewry D. H. and Young S. S. (1999) Approaches to the design of combinatorial libraries. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 48, 1–20.
Gorse D., Rees A., Kaczorek M., and Lahana R. (1999) Molecular diversity and its analysis. Drug Discov. Today 4, 257–264.
Mason J. S. and Hermsmeier M. A. (1999) Diversity assessment. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 3, 342–349.
Brown R. D. and Martin Y. C. (1996) Use of structure-activity data to compare structure-based clustering methods and descriptors for use in compound selection. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 36, 572–584
Matter H. (1997) Selecting optimally diverse compounds from structure databases: a validation study of two-dimensional and three-dimensional molecular descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 40, 1219–1229.
Cramer R. D., Clark R. D., Patterson D. E., and Ferguson A. M. (1996) Bioisosterism as a molecular diversity descriptor: steric fields of single topomeric conformers. J. Med. Chem. 39, 3060–3069.
Andrews K. M. and Cramer R. D. (2000) Toward general methods of targeted library design: topomer shape similarity searching with diverse structures as queries. J. Med. Chem. 43, 1723–1740.
Cramer R. D., Poss M. A., Hermsmeier M. A., Caulfield T. J., Kowala M. C., and Valentine M. T. (1999) Prospective identification of biologically active structures by topomer shape similarity searching. J. Med. Chem. 42, 3919–3933.
Clark R. D., Patterson D. E., Soltanshahi F., Blake J. F., and Matthew J. B. (2000) Visualizing substructural fingerprints. J. Mol. Graphics Mod. 18, 404–411.
Clark R. D. (1997) OptiSim: An extended dissimilarity selection method for finding diverse representative subsets. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 37, 1181–1188.
Ash S., Cline M. A., Homer R. W., Hurst T., and Smith G. B. (1997) SYBYL line notation (SLN): a versatile language for chemical structure representation. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 37, 71–79.
Weininger D. J. (1988) SMILES, a chemical language and information system.1. Introduction of methodology and encoding rules. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 28,31–36.
Agrafiotis K. and Lobanov V. S. (2000) Ultrafast algorithm for designing focused combinatorial arrays. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 40, 1030–1038.
Dalby A., Nourse J. G., Hounshell W. D., et al. (1992) Description of several chemical structure file formats used by computer programs developed at Molecular Design Limited. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 32, 244–255.
Willett P. (1986) Similarity and clustering in chemical information systems,Research Studies Press Letchwork, U. K.
Shi S., Peng Z., Kostrowicki J., Paderes G., and Kuki A. (2000) Efficient combinatorial filtering for desired molecular properties of reaction products. J. Mol.Graphics. Mod. 18, 478–496.
Holliday J. D. and Willett P. (1996) Definitions of “dissimilarity” for dissimilarity-based compound selection. J. Biomol. Screening 1, 145–151.
Willett P. and Winterman V. (1986) A comparison of some measures for the determination of intermolecular structural similarity. Quant. Struct. Activ. Relat. 5, 18–25.
Kubinyi H. (ed.) (1993) 3D QSAR in drug design, ESCOM, Leiden The Netherlands.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Humana Press Inc.
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Güssregen, S., Wendt, B., Warne, M. (2002). Approaches to Library Design for Combinatorial Chemistry. In: English, L.B. (eds) Combinatorial Library. Methods in Molecular Biology™, vol 201. Springer, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1385/1-59259-285-6:277
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/1-59259-285-6:277
Publisher Name: Springer, Totowa, NJ
Print ISBN: 978-0-89603-980-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-285-2
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols