Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Application of group-based QSAR and molecular docking in the design of insulin-like growth factor antagonists

Abubakar Danjuma Abdullahi1 , Abubakar Danjuma Abdullahi1 , Abdualrahman Mohammed Abdualkader2,4, Nadiahanis binti Abdulsamat3, Kundan Ingale5

1Department of Basic Medical Sciences; 2Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry; 3Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmacy, International Islamic University Malaysia, Jalan Istana, 25200, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia; 4Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry and Quality Control, Aleppo University, Syria; 5VLife Sciences Technologies Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.

For correspondence:-  Abubakar Abdullahi   Email: bagaruwa@gmail.com   Tel:+60199175042

Received: 16 May 2014        Accepted: 14 April 2015        Published: 29 June 2015

Citation: Abdullahi AD, Abdullahi AD, Abdualkader AM, Abdulsamat Nb, Ingale K. Application of group-based QSAR and molecular docking in the design of insulin-like growth factor antagonists. Trop J Pharm Res 2015; 14(6):941-951 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v14i6.2

© 2015 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To identify the structural requirements for designing a lead key for insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1R) inhibition using group-based quantitative structure activity relationship (GQSAR) and molecular docking.
Methods: GQSAR method requires fragmentation of molecules. The molecules in the current dataset were fragmented into three (R1, R2 and R3) by applying common fragmentation pattern, and fragment-based 2D descriptors were then calculated. GQSAR models were derived by applying various methods including multiple linear regressions and partial least square or k-nearest neighbour.
Results: Four generated GQSAR models were selected based on the statistical significance of the model. It was found that the presence of flexible and non-aromatic groups on fragment R1 was conducive for inhibition. Additionally, the existence of amino groups as hydrogen bond donors at fragments R2 and R3 was fruitful for inhibition. Docking studies revealed the binding orientation adopted by the active compounds at several amino acid residues, including Met 1126, Arg, 1128, Met 1052, GLU 1050, Met 1112, Leu 1051, Met 1049, Val 1033, and Val 983 at ATP binding sites of IGF-1R kinase domain.
Conclusion: The generated models provide a site-specific insight into the structural requirements for IGF-1R inhibition which can be used to design and develop potent inhibitors.

Keywords: Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) receptor, Quantitative structure-activity relationship, Adenosine triphosphate, Competitive inhibitors, Electroto

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.6 (2023)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 49 (2023)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates