3D QSAR Methods:  Phase and Catalyst Compared

The programs Phase and Catalyst HypoGen are compared for their performance in determining three-dimensional quantitative structure−activity relationships. Eight sets of compounds with measured activity were collected from the public literature and partitioned into suitable training and test sets by...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of chemical information and modeling 2007-05, Vol.47 (3), p.1248-1257
Main Authors: Evans, David A, Doman, Thompson N, Thorner, David A, Bodkin, Michael J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Algorithms
Catalysts
Chemistry
Molecular biology
Molecules
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The programs Phase and Catalyst HypoGen are compared for their performance in determining three-dimensional quantitative structure−activity relationships. Eight sets of compounds with measured activity were collected from the public literature and partitioned into suitable training and test sets by an automated procedure. A range of models is built with each program, and suggested parameter variations are investigated. The models are assessed by their ability to predict the activity of compounds in the test set, and it is demonstrated that the performance of Phase is better than or equal to that of Catalyst HypoGen, with the data sets and parameters used here. Additionally, compounds in two of the data sets are overlaid on crystallographic structures of similar ligands in complex with the target receptor, in order to guide pharmacophore generation by the two programs, but the resulting models do not perform better.
ISSN:1549-9596
1549-960X
DOI:10.1021/ci7000082