Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 7, 2026

In Silico Modeling Method for Computational Aquatic Toxicology of Endocrine Disruptors: A Software-Based Approach Using QSAR Toolbox
Published on: August 28, 2019
In silico prediction of estrogen receptor subtype binding affinity and selectivity using statistical methods and
Zhizhong Wang1, Yan Li, Chunzhi Ai
1Center of Bioinformatics, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, China;
Abstract:
Over the years development of selective estrogen receptor (ER) ligands has been of great concern to researchers involved in the chemistry and pharmacology of anticancer drugs, resulting in numerous synthesized selective ER subtype inhibitors. In this work, a data set of 82 ER ligands with ERα and ERβ inhibitory activities was built, and quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) methods based on the two linear (multiple linear regression, MLR, partial least squares regression, PLSR) and a nonlinear statistical method (Bayesian regularized neural network, BRNN) were applied to investigate the potential relationship of molecular structural features related to the activity and selectivity of these ligands. For ERα and ERβ, the performances of the MLR and PLSR models are superior to the BRNN model, giving more reasonable statistical properties (ERα: for MLR, R(tr) (2) = 0.72, Q(te) (2) = 0.63; for PLSR, R(tr) (2) = 0.92, Q(te) (2) = 0.84. ERβ: for MLR, R(tr) (2) = 0.75, Q(te) (2) = 0.75; for PLSR, R(tr) (2) = 0.98, Q(te) (2) = 0.80). The MLR method is also more powerful than other two methods for generating the subtype selectivity models, resulting in R(tr) (2) = 0.74 and Q(te) (2) = 0.80. In addition, the molecular docking method was also used to explore the possible binding modes of the ligands and a relationship between the 3D-binding modes and the 2D-molecular structural features of ligands was further explored. The results show that the binding affinity strength for both ERα and ERβ is more correlated with the atom fragment type, polarity, electronegativites and hydrophobicity. The substitutent in position 8 of the naphthalene or the quinoline plane and the space orientation of these two planes contribute the most to the subtype selectivity on the basis of similar hydrogen bond interactions between binding ligands and both ER subtypes. The QSAR models built together with the docking procedure should be of great advantage for screening and designing ER ligands with improved affinity and subtype selectivity property.
Related Concept Videos
The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength
Structure-Activity Relationships and Drug Design
SAR studies the intricate relationship between a drug's chemical structure and biological activity. It focuses on understanding how modifications to a drug's structure can influence its...
Transducer Mechanism: Nuclear Receptors
About 48 different soluble family members of nuclear receptors are identified that can be divided into two main classes:
Ligand Binding Sites
Protein-ligand interactions are quite specific; even though numerous potential ligands surround a cellular protein at any given time, only a particular ligand can bind to that protein. Moreover, a ligand binds only to a dedicated area on the surface of the protein, known as the...
Quantitative Aspects of Drug-Receptor Interaction
