首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Cheminformatics >Analysis of drug–endogenous human metabolite similarities in terms of their maximum common substructures
【2h】

Analysis of drug–endogenous human metabolite similarities in terms of their maximum common substructures

机译:药物内源性人类代谢物相似性的最大共同亚结构分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In previous work, we have assessed the structural similarities between marketed drugs (‘drugs’) and endogenous natural human metabolites (‘metabolites’ or ‘endogenites’), using ‘fingerprint’ methods in common use, and the Tanimoto and Tversky similarity metrics, finding that the fingerprint encoding used had a dramatic effect on the apparent similarities observed. By contrast, the maximal common substructure (MCS), when the means of determining it is fixed, is a means of determining similarities that is largely independent of the fingerprints, and also has a clear chemical meaning. We here explored the utility of the MCS and metrics derived therefrom. In many cases, a shared scaffold helps cluster drugs and endogenites, and gives insight into enzymes (in particular transporters) that they both share. Tanimoto and Tversky similarities based on the MCS tend to be smaller than those based on the MACCS fingerprint-type encoding, though the converse is also true for a significant fraction of the comparisons. While no single molecular descriptor can account for these differences, a machine learning-based analysis of the nature of the differences (MACCS_Tanimoto vs MCS_Tversky) shows that they are indeed deterministic, although the features that are used in the model to account for this vary greatly with each individual drug. The extent of its utility and interpretability vary with the drug of interest, implying that while MCS is neither ‘better’ nor ‘worse’ for every drug–endogenite comparison, it is sufficiently different to be of value. The overall conclusion is thus that the use of the MCS provides an additional and valuable strategy for understanding the structural basis for similarities between synthetic, marketed drugs and natural intermediary metabolites. Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13321-017-0198-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
机译:在先前的工作中,我们使用常用的“指纹”方法以及Tanimoto和Tversky相似性指标,评估了市售药物(“药物”)和内源性天然人类代谢物(“代谢物”或“内生体”)之间的结构相似性,发现所使用的指纹编码对观察到的表观相似性具有显着影响。相比之下,最大共同子结构(MCS)在确定其固定性的方法时,是一种确定相似性的方法,其在很大程度上与指纹无关,并且具有明确的化学含义。我们在这里探讨了MCS的效用以及从中得出的指标。在许多情况下,共享的支架有助于聚集药物和内生分子,并深入了解它们共同共享的酶(特别是转运蛋白)。基于MCS的Tanimoto和Tversky相似度往往小于基于MACCS指纹类型编码的相似度,尽管在大部分比较中反之亦然。尽管没有单个分子描述符可以解释这些差异,但是基于机器学习的差异性质分析(MACCS_Tanimoto与MCS_Tversky)表明它们确实是确定性的,尽管模型中用于说明此差异的功能差异很大与每种药物。它的实用性和可解释性的程度随目标药物的不同而不同,这意味着尽管MCS在每次药物-内生石比较中既不是“更好”也不是“更差”,但它具有足够的价值。因此,总的结论是,MCS的使用为理解合成,市售药物与天然中间代谢物之间相似性的结构基础提供了另一种有价值的策略。电子补充材料本文的在线版本(doi:10.1186 / s13321-017-0198-y)包含补充材料,授权用户可以使用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号