Complementarity Between a Docking and a High-Throughput Screen in Discovering New Cruzain Inhibitors

Citations Over TimeTop 1% of 2010 papers

Abstract

Virtual and high-throughput screens (HTS) should have complementary strengths and weaknesses, but studies that prospectively and comprehensively compare them are rare. We undertook a parallel docking and HTS screen of 197861 compounds against cruzain, a thiol protease target for Chagas disease, looking for reversible, competitive inhibitors. On workup, 99% of the hits were eliminated as false positives, yielding 146 well-behaved, competitive ligands. These fell into five chemotypes: two were prioritized by scoring among the top 0.1% of the docking-ranked library, two were prioritized by behavior in the HTS and by clustering, and one chemotype was prioritized by both approaches. Determination of an inhibitor/cruzain crystal structure and comparison of the high-scoring docking hits to experiment illuminated the origins of docking false-negatives and false-positives. Prioritizing molecules that are both predicted by docking and are HTS-active yields well-behaved molecules, relatively unobscured by the false-positives to which both techniques are individually prone.

Related Papers

• → Comparison of Shape-Matching and Docking as Virtual Screening Tools(2006)1,004 cited
• → Protein Flexibility in Ligand Docking and Virtual Screening to Protein Kinases(2004)413 cited
• → PLHINT: A knowledge-driven computational approach based on the intermolecular H bond interactions at the protein-ligand interface from docking solutions(2017)14 cited
• → Uncovering false positives on a virtual screening search for cruzain inhibitors(2007)19 cited
• Virtual screening and docking on cardiovascular disease(2013)