Posts Tagged ‘Derek Lowe’

Silicon drug analogues.

Sunday, January 14th, 2018

I don’t normally write about the pharmaceutical industry, but I was intrigued by several posts by Derek Lowe (who does cover this area) on the topic of creating new drugs by deuterating existing ones. Thus he covered the first deuterated drug receiving FDA approval last year, having first reviewed the concept back in 2009. So when someone introduced me to sila-haloperidol, I checked to see if Derek had written about it. Apparently not, so here are a few details.

The idea appears to take a well-known drug, in this case haloperidol and selectively replacing a carbon atom with a silicon atom to form silahaloperidol.[1] The compound was actually reported in 2004 (see data citation 10.5517/cc7yhc0) but its drug-like properties were only reported four years later in 2008. Haloperidol itself has some undesirable side-effects, including those due to the metabolic products of the drug and so there are certainly reasons for trying to reduce these. Here are the main conclusions:

  1. The sila drug shows a significantly higher affinity for hD2 receptors (Table 1).
  2. Silahaloperidol exhibits higher subtype selectivity at dopamine and σ receptors
  3. The substitution by silicon has little effect on physico-chemical profiles
  4. The in-vivo half-life of the sila analogue was 3.6 times shorter (~18 minutes).
  5. An almost three-fold inhibitory effect against CYP3A4 was noted.
  6. The sila-drug displayed “a completely altered metabolic fate while otherwise maintaining a similar pharmacokinetic profile”.

These do seem to add up to a promising route for optimising drug activities. The authors themselves note the “great potential” for drug design. A review in 2017[2] concurs. So along with deuterated drugs, perhaps siladrugs are ones to watch in the future!

References

  1. R. Tacke, F. Popp, B. Müller, B. Theis, C. Burschka, A. Hamacher, M. Kassack, D. Schepmann, B. Wünsch, U. Jurva, and E. Wellner, "Sila‐Haloperidol, a Silicon Analogue of the Dopamine (D <sub>2</sub> ) Receptor Antagonist Haloperidol: Synthesis, Pharmacological Properties, and Metabolic Fate", ChemMedChem, vol. 3, pp. 152-164, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1002/cmdc.200700205
  2. R. Ramesh, and D.S. Reddy, "Quest for Novel Chemical Entities through Incorporation of Silicon in Drug Scaffolds", Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 61, pp. 3779-3798, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.7b00718

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in General | No Comments »

CH⋅⋅⋅π Interactions between methyl and carbonyl groups in proteins: a small molecule check.

Monday, May 29th, 2017

Derek Lowe highlights a recent article[1] postulating CH⋅⋅⋅π interactions in proteins. Here I report a quick check using the small molecule crystal structure database (CSD).

The search query (DOI: 10.14469/hpc/2594) is shown below.

  1. The distance refers to that between the (normalised) position of a hydrogen on a 4-coordinated carbon atom and the centroid of a carbonyl group substituted with R=C or H. 
  2. The angle is that subtended at the centroid. An approach orthogonal to the axis of the carbonyl group will have a value of 1.0 for the sine.
  3. The torsion relates to the angle between the H…centroid and C-R vectors. The absolute value is constrained to 70-110° to filter only approaches towards the π-system of the carbonyl.
  4. The search is further restricted to no disorder, no errors and R < 0.05. 

The two most interesting hits, both revealing short distances and ~orthogonal approaches to the π-system are:

Remember however that such “outliers” must always be carefully inspected. There are more numerous interactions in the region 2.4-2.6Å with a sine(angle) of >0.9 and and a close orthogonal approach to the π-system (green dots) which probably qualify for the title above. There seem many interesting but still putative small-molecule candidates for this proposed interaction postulated for proteins. 

Postscript:  Here the results of the search above with R= any of H,C,N,O,F,Cl up to values of the distance <2.4Å, which show a range of interesting (green) points.

References

  1. F.A. Perras, D. Marion, J. Boisbouvier, D.L. Bryce, and M.J. Plevin, "Observation of CH⋅⋅⋅π Interactions between Methyl and Carbonyl Groups in Proteins", Angewandte Chemie International Edition, vol. 56, pp. 7564-7567, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201702626

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in crystal_structure_mining | 2 Comments »

Ritonavir: a look at a famous example of conformational polymorphism.

Monday, January 2nd, 2017

Here is an inside peek at another one of Derek Lowe’s 250 milestones in chemistry, the polymorphism of Ritonavir.[1] The story in a nutshell concerns one of a pharma company’s worst nightmares; a drug which has been successfully brought to market unexpectedly “changes” after a few years on market to a less effective form (or to use the drug term, formulation). This can happen via a phenomenon known as polymorphism, where the crystalline structure of a molecule can have more than one form. In this case, form I was formulated into soluble tablets for oral intake. During later manufacturing, a new less-soluble form appeared and “within weeks this new polymorph began to appear throughout both the bulk drug and formulation areas“[1]

The structure of the original form I is shown below (3D DOI: 10.5517/CCRVC75). The compound has three HN-CO peptide linkages, all of which are in the stereoelectronically favoured s-cis form, with a dihedral angle of 180° across the H-N and C=O vectors.

Click for 3D

To show how favourable this s-cis form is, here is a search of the Cambridge structural database for acyclic HN-C=O bonds; of the ~8200 examples, only 5 have an s-trans torsion of ~180°. It is I feel statistically not entirely correct to convert this ratio of K=1640 to a free energy, but if one does, then at 298K, RTlnK works out to 4.4 kcal/mol. Note also that two compounds show an angle of ~90° (artefacts?).

The new type-II form that emerged has only two s-cis peptide linkages, and the third has isomerised to this higher energy s-trans form (3D DOI: 10.5517/CCRVC97)

Click for 3D

This has various knock-on effects on the conformation of the actual molecule itself.

  1. The cis-trans isomerisation of a peptide or amide bond is a relatively high energy process, since the C=N bond order is higher than 1. For example, in the 1H NMR spectrum of N,N-dimethyl formamide at room temperature, one can famously observe two methyl resonances and it is only at higher temperatures that the two signals coalesce due to more rapid rotation about the C=N bond.
  2. A pedant might query whether this isomerism is correctly termed a conformational or a configurational change? High-energy rotations that result in cis/trans isomerisms are normally referred to as a configurational changes, whereas low energy rotations about e.g. single bonds are known as conformational changes (thus the conformational changes in cyclohexane). There is a grey region such as this one, where the boundary between the two terms is encountered. 
  3. This isomerism has the knock-on effect of inducing a much lower energy rotation of a C-C single bond (on the left hand side of the representations above), rotating from a dihedral angle of +193 in form I to +51 in form II.
  4. More minor affects are seen in the conformation of the central benzyl group and the S/N heterocyclic ring on the right hand side.
  5. All these low energy conformational effects occur because a better hydrogen bonding network can then be set up in the crystal lattice, something not easily predictable  from the diagrams of the single molecules shown above.
  6. Overall, the free energy of the lattice is lower, despite the higher energy of the s-trans peptide bond. 
  7. Clearly, the dynamics of crystallisation initially favoured form I (despite the higher energy of the crystallised outcome), but if a tiny seed of form II is present (or perhaps other impurities) this can dramatically (but unpredictably) change these crystallisation dynamics.

I suspect that since 1998 when this story unfolded, all new drugs in which one or more s-cis peptide bonds are present have caused anxiety. In the system above for example, one might ask whether cis/trans isomerisation of instead either of the other two peptide bonds present might have similar results? Or hypothesize whether inhibiting the associated rotation of the C-C single bond noted above by appropriate “tethering” might prevent form I from converting to form II. Since 1998, I am sure trying to predict the solid form of an organic molecule from its isolated structure using computational methods has dramatically increased, although I have not found in SciFinder any reported instances of such modelling for Ritonavir itself.[2] Perhaps, if such a method were found, it might be too commercially valuable to share?

References

  1. J. Bauer, S. Spanton, R. Henry, J. Quick, W. Dziki, W. Porter, and J. Morris, "Ritonavir: An Extraordinary Example of Conformational Polymorphism", Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 18, pp. 859-866, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1011052932607
  2. S.R. Chemburkar, J. Bauer, K. Deming, H. Spiwek, K. Patel, J. Morris, R. Henry, S. Spanton, W. Dziki, W. Porter, J. Quick, P. Bauer, J. Donaubauer, B.A. Narayanan, M. Soldani, D. Riley, and K. McFarland, "Dealing with the Impact of Ritonavir Polymorphs on the Late Stages of Bulk Drug Process Development", Organic Process Research & Development, vol. 4, pp. 413-417, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1021/op000023y

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Interesting chemistry | No Comments »

The “hydrogen bond”; its early history.

Saturday, December 31st, 2016

My holiday reading has been Derek Lowe’s excellent Chemistry Book setting out 250 milestones in chemistry, organised by year. An entry for 1920 entitled hydrogen bonding seemed worth exploring in more detail here.

As with many historical concepts, it can often take a few years to coalesce into something we would readily recognise today, and hydrogen bonds are no exception. Wikipedia is another source of the history and it cites a 1912 article as the origin of the term in relation to the solvation of amines[1] but also notes that the better known setting of water occurs later in 1920.[2] Here I try to capture the essence of the concept with a few diagrams taken from these two articles.

 Firstly “The state of amines in aqueous solution“[1] which is mostly concerned with the measurement of ionization constants of primary, secondary and tertiary amines. It boils down to the below:

and the connection to ionization is laid out as:

Since in 1912, Lewis’ electron pair theory of the covalent bond had not yet emerged, the authors use the terms “strong union” and “weak union”, and of course it is the “weak union” that we now know of as the hydrogen bond. Some other comments about this seminal diagram:

  1. The article contains the very explicit and modern term stereochemical, which is used in a manner that suggests it was already common.‡ But there is only a hint at most that the nitrogen atoms might be tetrahedral, or that the “weak union” between (what we now think of as the lone pair on) the nitrogen and the hydrogen of the water is directional.
  2. The second weak union between the tetramethyl ammonium (which we now describe as a cation) and the hydroxide (now described as an anion; both terms are however implied by the description strong electrolyte) is probably not what we would now call a hydrogen bond, more an intimate ion-pair.

The second article in 1920 on water itself[2] is post-Lewis, but perhaps applied in a manner which we would not entirely agree with nowadays. Thus dinitrogen, N≡N is shown as below with just a single connecting bond.

Then we get the interaction between ammonia and water,† analogous to the example shown above:

and for water itself:♠

which in each case shows the central hydrogen having what we now call a valence shell of four electrons,♣ and hence more equivalent to the “strong unions” above. This shows that in 1920 chemists were rapidly adopting Lewis’ representations, but not always entirely successfully.

On balance, I think the 1912 article sets out the modern concept of a hydrogen bond representing a weak union to a hydrogen rather better than the Latimer and Rodebush attempt (at least diagrammatically).

‡Stereochemical notation is discussed in this post, and it dates from the 1930s.

†The modern take is explored here, in which the equilibrium set up between a “weak union” between ammonia and water (the weak electrolyte) and an isomeric “strong union” which represents ionization into an ammonium hydroxide ion-pair (the strong electrolyte) is favoured for the former by ΔG ~6 kcal/mol.

♠The equilibrium between a “weak union” of two water molecules and the fully ionized strong union of hydronium hydroxide favours the former by ΔG ~23 kcal/mol.

♣ This 1920 representation does imply symmetry for the hydrogen, being ~equally disposed between the two oxygens. We now know that such symmetric hydrogen bonding is not unusual (see this post for how to fine-tune a hydrogen bond into this situation) but rather than requiring four electrons as implied in the diagram above, it is now better described as a three-centre-two-electron bond instead.

References

  1. T.S. Moore, and T.F. Winmill, "CLXXVII.—The state of amines in aqueous solution", J. Chem. Soc., Trans., vol. 101, pp. 1635-1676, 1912. https://doi.org/10.1039/ct9120101635
  2. W.M. Latimer, and W.H. Rodebush, "POLARITY AND IONIZATION FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE LEWIS THEORY OF VALENCE.", Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 42, pp. 1419-1433, 1920. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja01452a015

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Historical | 2 Comments »

The "hydrogen bond"; its early history.

Saturday, December 31st, 2016

My holiday reading has been Derek Lowe’s excellent Chemistry Book setting out 250 milestones in chemistry, organised by year. An entry for 1920 entitled hydrogen bonding seemed worth exploring in more detail here.

As with many historical concepts, it can often take a few years to coalesce into something we would readily recognise today, and hydrogen bonds are no exception. Wikipedia is another source of the history and it cites a 1912 article as the origin of the term in relation to the solvation of amines[1] but also notes that the better known setting of water occurs later in 1920.[2] Here I try to capture the essence of the concept with a few diagrams taken from these two articles.

 Firstly “The state of amines in aqueous solution“[1] which is mostly concerned with the measurement of ionization constants of primary, secondary and tertiary amines. It boils down to the below:

and the connection to ionization is laid out as:

Since in 1912, Lewis’ electron pair theory of the covalent bond had not yet emerged, the authors use the terms “strong union” and “weak union”, and of course it is the “weak union” that we now know of as the hydrogen bond. Some other comments about this seminal diagram:

  1. The article contains the very explicit and modern term stereochemical, which is used in a manner that suggests it was already common.‡ But there is only a hint at most that the nitrogen atoms might be tetrahedral, or that the “weak union” between (what we now think of as the lone pair on) the nitrogen and the hydrogen of the water is directional.
  2. The second weak union between the tetramethyl ammonium (which we now describe as a cation) and the hydroxide (now described as an anion; both terms are however implied by the description strong electrolyte) is probably not what we would now call a hydrogen bond, more an intimate ion-pair.

The second article in 1920 on water itself[2] is post-Lewis, but perhaps applied in a manner which we would not entirely agree with nowadays. Thus dinitrogen, N≡N is shown as below with just a single connecting bond.

Then we get the interaction between ammonia and water,† analogous to the example shown above:

and for water itself:♠

which in each case shows the central hydrogen having what we now call a valence shell of four electrons,♣ and hence more equivalent to the “strong unions” above. This shows that in 1920 chemists were rapidly adopting Lewis’ representations, but not always entirely successfully.

On balance, I think the 1912 article sets out the modern concept of a hydrogen bond representing a weak union to a hydrogen rather better than the Latimer and Rodebush attempt (at least diagrammatically).

‡Stereochemical notation is discussed in this post, and it dates from the 1930s.

†The modern take is explored here, in which the equilibrium set up between a “weak union” between ammonia and water (the weak electrolyte) and an isomeric “strong union” which represents ionization into an ammonium hydroxide ion-pair (the strong electrolyte) is favoured for the former by ΔG ~6 kcal/mol.

♠The equilibrium between a “weak union” of two water molecules and the fully ionized strong union of hydronium hydroxide favours the former by ΔG ~23 kcal/mol.

♣ This 1920 representation does imply symmetry for the hydrogen, being ~equally disposed between the two oxygens. We now know that such symmetric hydrogen bonding is not unusual (see this post for how to fine-tune a hydrogen bond into this situation) but rather than requiring four electrons as implied in the diagram above, it is now better described as a three-centre-two-electron bond instead.

References

  1. T.S. Moore, and T.F. Winmill, "CLXXVII.—The state of amines in aqueous solution", J. Chem. Soc., Trans., vol. 101, pp. 1635-1676, 1912. https://doi.org/10.1039/ct9120101635
  2. W.M. Latimer, and W.H. Rodebush, "POLARITY AND IONIZATION FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE LEWIS THEORY OF VALENCE.", Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 42, pp. 1419-1433, 1920. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja01452a015

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Historical | 2 Comments »

How to stop (some) acetals hydrolysing.

Thursday, November 12th, 2015

Derek Lowe has a recent post entitled “Another Funny-Looking Structure Comes Through“. He cites a recent medchem article[1] in which the following acetal sub-structure appears in a promising drug candidate (blue component below). His point is that orally taken drugs have to survive acid (green below) encountered in the stomach, and acetals are famously sensitive to hydrolysis (red below). But if X=NH2, compound “G-5555” is apparently stable to acids.[1] So I pose the question here; why?

acetal

This reminded me of some work we did a few years ago on herbicides containing such an acetal substructure, where one diastereoisomer was very unstable to hydrolysis (and hence did not have the lifetime required of a herbicide) whereas the other diastereomer was far less labile and hence more suitable.[2],[3] Crystal structures (below) revealed that the two C-O bond lengths of the labile form were very unequal in length (Δ0.043Å), whereas the stable form had two equal C-O lengths (1.408Å, Δ=0.0Å).

Click for 3D

KAWYOW, Click for 3D

Click for 3D

KAWYEM, Click for 3D

A search of the Cambridge structure database (CSD) surprisingly reveals no hits for molecules containing the (blue) substructure in which X=NH2, but there is one example[4],[5] of an orthoformate in which the group equivalent to X is protonated as Me2NH+. For this example, all three C-O lengths are shorter than even the hydrolytically stable herbicide above (1.405, 1.402, 1.396Å). The distribution for 6-ring acetals in general shows hot-spots at ~1.415Å and 1.43Å (but sadly it is not possible to e.g. use this database to correlate these lengths with the aqueous stability of the entries).

OCO

Is this tentative further evidence that a group X = NH2 positioned as above in an acetal can inhibit its hydrolysis?

HUZKEZ, click for 3D

HUZKEZ, click for 3D

Time for calculations. A model (X=R=H) for the hydrolysis was constructed as above in which proton transfer from an acid (ethanoic) is achieved via a cyclic 8-ring transition state and which includes a continuum solvent field as ωB97XD/6-311G(d,p)/SCRF=water and one explicit water in the proton relay. The IRC looks thus:

acetalH

This shows that the first event is protonation of an oxygen, closely followed by cleavage of the associated C-O bond, and ending with deprotonation of the erstwhile water molecule.

acetalha

The value of ΔG‡298 is 38.2 kcal/mol (38.4 in relative total energy). Although rather high for a facile thermal reaction (perhaps the 8-ring TS is a bit too strained; possibly adding a second active water molecule to form a 10-ring might lead to a lower barrier?), we are more interested in the effect upon this barrier of group X (Table below).

X ΔE ΔG‡ DataDOI,TS DataDOI,IRC
H 38.4 38.2 [6] [7]
NH2,eq 39.8 38.8 [8] [9]
NH3.Cl,eq 45.1 43.1 [10] [11]
NH3.Cl,ax 42.6 41.5 [12] [13]
CF3,eq‡ 41.9 40.1 [14] [15]
SF5,eq‡ 43.6 42.4 [16] [17]

Introduction of X=NH3+.Cl– into an (equatorial) position which is antiperiplanar to the C-O bonds of the acetal produces a modified IRC profile. The barrier measured at a point IRC = -10 is ~41 kcal/mol, which is noticeably higher than for X=H. In fact the final barrier is even higher, since the reactant goes on to form a hydrogen bond between the water molecule and the Cl–, an extra stabilisation not present with X=H (and so not really appropriate to include in the comparison).

acetal-NH3Cl

acetalnh3cl-eqa

Placing the X=NH3+.Cl– into an (axial) position which is not antiperiplanar to the C-O bonds shows a lower barrier compared to the equatorial isomer. This difference can also be illustrated by the NBO localised orbital energies of the two reactants. With X=NH3+.Cl– axial, the lone pair on the oxygen being protonated by the acid has an energy of -0.464 au, whereas the equatorial equivalent is a “less reactive” -0.471 au (a difference in energy of 4.4 kcal/mol, which is VERY approximately related to the effects being discussed).

I conclude that the inhibition of acetal solvolysis is induced by the presence of an electron withdrawing group X, via antiperiplanar effects on the basicity of the acetal oxygen. In moderately low pH, X=NH2 is likely to be fully protonated; in this state, X=NH3+.Cl– is an even better electron withdrawing group. The effect is also much stronger if X = equatorial. So one can predict here that if the alternate stereoisomer with X = axial were to be synthesised, it would hydrolyse more quickly. Other groups (X=F, CN etc) would probably show similar behaviour.‡

‡ I have added two further entries, X=CF3 and X=SF5 in the table above, showing the latter to be more effective at inhibiting hydrolysis.

References

  1. C.O. Ndubaku, J.J. Crawford, J. Drobnick, I. Aliagas, D. Campbell, P. Dong, L.M. Dornan, S. Duron, J. Epler, L. Gazzard, C.E. Heise, K.P. Hoeflich, D. Jakubiak, H. La, W. Lee, B. Lin, J.P. Lyssikatos, J. Maksimoska, R. Marmorstein, L.J. Murray, T. O’Brien, A. Oh, S. Ramaswamy, W. Wang, X. Zhao, Y. Zhong, E. Blackwood, and J. Rudolph, "Design of Selective PAK1 Inhibitor G-5555: Improving Properties by Employing an Unorthodox Low-p <i>K</i> <sub>a</sub> Polar Moiety", ACS Medicinal Chemistry Letters, vol. 6, pp. 1241-1246, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsmedchemlett.5b00398
  2. P. Camilleri, D. Munro, K. Weaver, D.J. Williams, H.S. Rzepa, and A.M.Z. Slawin, "Isoxazolinyldioxepins. Part 1. Structure–reactivity studies of the hydrolysis of oxazolinyldioxepin derivatives", J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, pp. 1265-1269, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1039/p29890001265
  3. P. Camilleri, D. Munro, K. Weaver, D.J. Williams, H.S. Rzepa, and A.M.Z. Slawin, "Isoxazolinyldioxepins. Part 1. Structure–reactivity studies of the hydrolysis of oxazolinyldioxepin derivatives", J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, pp. 1929-1933, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1039/p29890001929
  4. Beckmann, C.., Jones, P.G.., and Kirby, A.J.., "CCDC 209989: Experimental Crystal Structure Determination", 2003. https://doi.org/10.5517/cc71hvl
  5. C. Beckmann, P.G. Jones, and A.J. Kirby, "<i>N,N,N</i>′,<i>N</i>′-Tetramethylstreptamine 2,4,6-orthoformate hydrochloride", Acta Crystallographica Section E Structure Reports Online, vol. 59, pp. o566-o568, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1107/s1600536803006287
  6. H.S. Rzepa, "C 6 H 14 O 5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191581
  7. H.S. Rzepa, "Gaussian Job Archive for C6H14O5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1599751
  8. H.S. Rzepa, "C 6 H 15 N 1 O 5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191582
  9. H.S. Rzepa, "C6H15NO5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191586
  10. H.S. Rzepa, "C 6 H 16 Cl 1 N 1 O 5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191584
  11. H.S. Rzepa, "C6H16ClNO5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191588
  12. H.S. Rzepa, "C 6 H 16 Cl 1 N 1 O 5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191590
  13. H.S. Rzepa, "Gaussian Job Archive for C6H16ClNO5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1601891
  14. H.S. Rzepa, "C 7 H 13 F 3 O 5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191592
  15. H.S. Rzepa, "Gaussian Job Archive for C7H13F3O5", 2015. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1603088
  16. H.S. Rzepa, "C 6 H 13 F 5 O 5 S 1", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191595
  17. H.S. Rzepa, "Gaussian Job Archive for C6H13F5O5S", 2015. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1603420

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in reaction mechanism | 2 Comments »

A convincing example of the need for data repositories. FAIR Data.

Thursday, January 15th, 2015

Derek Lowe in his In the Pipeline blog is famed for spotting unusual claims in the literature and subjecting them to analysis. This one is entitled Odd Structures, Subjected to Powerful Computations. He looks at this image below, and finds the structures represented there might be a mistake, based on his considerable experience of these kinds of molecules. I expect he had a gut feeling within seconds of seeing the diagram.

Indeed, so, you will now find that the authors have apparently acknowledged a mistake[1]. My interest piqued, I went to the article, and immediately tracked down the supplementary information. Surely, if these molecules had been subjected to powerful computation, this supporting information should contain coordinates of some kind that would allow a correlation with the 2D structural representation shown above. I have just returned from FORCE2015, a three-day event in Oxford. From the detailed agenda, you can see that a lot of the conference centered around what is called FAIR Data. FAIR stands for:

  1. Findable
  2. Accessible
  3. Interoperable
  4. Re-usable

So I then set out to find if the supplementary information WAS FAIR. Well, check for yourself (unlike the narrative article, the data should be accessible outside of the paywall, i.e. you should not need a subscription to access it). It is certainly big, running out to 45 pages, in the form of a paginated PDF file (the norm). The table of contents does not refer to data as such, but it does quote 25 figures, from which you might just be able to extract some data. But no molecules as such! So:

  1. No data is findable, although the  PDF which might contain it is reasonably so.
  2. The data is not easily accessible,
  3. let alone interoperable (thus many of the charts were probably created using spreadsheet software, but the source files for these are not available),
  4. and not-reusable (certainly not without loss and possible error in any attempt at capture).

I think it fair to say that the data for these powerful computations are not FAIR. Had we had at least some coordinates (the computations involved molecular mechanics based dynamics simulations, which certainly involve manipulating atom coordinates in some form) then the structures shown in the figure above could be checked, and perhaps even the apparent error would have been quickly spotted.

Derek does not make the point about FAIR data (to be fair, he was not at FORCE2015) and so I will make the case. If you are reporting a computational model or simulation, there is no excuse for not supplying FAIR data to accompany it. If the data is FAIR it will be inter-operable and re-usable. And this will instantly allow anyone to check e.g. the structures above. You would not need to have Derek’s vast experience and instinct (although having it is also helps). And of course we might presume that there were 2-3 referees that also looked at the article, and presumably none of them requested FAIR data.

Oh, if you are interested in my take on FAIR data, I gave a talk about that at FORCE2015, which you are welcome to view; I hope it constitutes a FAIR talk!

References

  1. K.J. Kohlhoff, D. Shukla, M. Lawrenz, G.R. Bowman, D.E. Konerding, D. Belov, R.B. Altman, and V.S. Pande, "Cloud-based simulations on Google Exacycle reveal ligand modulation of GPCR activation pathways", Nature Chemistry, vol. 6, pp. 15-21, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchem.1821

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Chemical IT, General | No Comments »