A. Manvar et al. / European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 43 (2008) 2395e2403
2403
and predictive power. To further assess the robustness and sta-
tistical confidence of the derived models, cross-validation by
Leave-Group-Out22 (LGO in groups of 5) and bootstrapping
[22] analysis for 100 runs was performed. Bootstrapping in-
volves the generation of many new data sets from the original
data set and is obtained by randomly choosing samples from
the original data set. The statistical calculation is performed
on each of these bootstrap samplings. The difference between
the parameters calculated from the original data set and the
average of the parameters calculated from the many bootstrap
samplings is a measure of the bias of the original calculations.
Models with a cross-validation (q2) value above 0.3 were
sought, since at this value the probability of chance correlation
is less than 5% [23].
and Technology (DST), India for the financial assistance.
Alpeshkumar Malde and Jitender Verma thank the Council of
Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India for the award
of a Senior Research Fellowship. The computational facilities
at BCP were provided by the All India Council for Technical Ed-
ucation through grant F. No. 8022/RID/NPROJ/RPS-5/2003-04.
References
[1] P.J. Dolin, M.D. Raviglione, Bull. WorldHealthOrgan. 72(1994) 213e220.
[2] A.M. Rouchi, Chem. Eng. News 77 (1999) 52e69.
[3] Global Tuberculosis Control: Surveillance, Planning, Financing WHO
Report, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2006, (WHO/HTM/TB/
2006.362).
[5] W.J. Burman, B.E. Jones, Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 164 (2001) 7e12.
[6] R.V. Somu, H. Boshoff, C. Qiao, E.M. Bennett, C.E. Barry, C.C. Aldrich,
J. Med. Chem. 49 (2006) 31e34.
4.3.7. Predictive correlation coefficient
The predictive ability of each 3D-QSAR model was deter-
mined from a test set of 6 molecules not included in the model
generation. The predictive correlation coefficient (r2pred), based
on the test set molecules, is defined as
[7] K. Johnsson, P.G. Schultz, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 116 (1994) 7425e7426.
[8] G.A. Wachter, M.C. Davis, A.R. Martin, S.G. Franzblau, J. Med. Chem.
¨
41 (1998) 2436e2438.
[9] (a) S. Kaufman, J. Van Embden, Trends. Microbiol. 1 (1993) 2e5;
(b) B.R. Bloom, C.J. Murray, Science 257 (1992) 1055e1064;
(c) M.A. Fischl, G.L. Daikos, R.B. Uttamchandani, R.B. Poblete,
J.N. Moreno, R.R. Reyes, A.M. Boota, L.M. Thompson, T.J. Cleary,
S.A. Oldham, Ann. Intern. Med. 117 (1992) 184e190.
[10] N. Dodia, A. Shah, Ind. J. Heterocycl. Chem. 9 (1999) 139e142.
[11] N. Dodia, A. Shah, Ind. J. Heterocycl. Chem. 10 (2000) 69e70.
[12] A. Nayyar, R. Jain, Curr. Med. Chem. 12 (2005) 1873e1886.
[13] (a) V. Pechmann, Duisberg, Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 16 (1883) 2127;
(b) V. Pechmann, Kraft, Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 34 (1901) 421;
(c) B.B. Dey, J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 107 (1915) 1606e1651;
(d) D.J. Limaye, J. Indian Chem. Soc. 4 (1927) 159e161.
[14] R.D. Cramer, D.E. Patterson, J.D. Bunce, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110 (1988)
5959e5967.
rp2red ¼ ðSD ꢁ PRESSÞ=SD
where SD is the sum of squared deviations between the biolog-
ical activity of the test set and the mean activity of the training
set molecules and the PRESS is the sum of squared deviations
between predicted and actual activity values for every mole-
cule in the test set.
4.3.8. CoMFA contour maps
Contour maps were generated as a scalar product of coeffi-
cients and standard deviation (SD ꢂ Coeff) associated with
each column. Favored and disfavored levels, fixed at 80 and
20%, respectively, were used to display the steric and the elec-
trostatic fields. The contours for steric fields are shown in
green (more bulk favored) and yellow (less bulk favored),
while the electrostatic field contours are displayed in red (elec-
tronegative substituents favored) and blue (electropositive sub-
stituents favored) colors.
[15] E.J. Martin, J.M. Blaney, M.A. Siani, D.C. Spellmeyer, A.K. Wong,
W.H. Moos, J. Med. Chem. 39 (1995) 1431e1436.
[16] CoMFA and QSAR Manual, Sybyl 7.1, Associates Inc., 1699 S Hanley
Road, St. Louis, MO 631444, USA.
[17] Sybyl 7.1, Tripos Associates Inc., 1699 S Hanley Road, St. Louis, MO
631444, USA.
[18] (a) A. Jain, M.V. Kulkarni, N.C. Shivaprakash, Acta Crystallogr. C62
(1995) 2585e2586;
(b) Y. Cui-Cui, W. Li, X. Zhi-Yong, S. Xue-Fang, Acta Crystallogr. E62
(2006) o3274eo3275.
Acknowledgements
[19] T.A. Halgren, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 112 (1990) 4710e4723.
[20] Sung Jin Cho, Alexander Tropsha, J. Med. Chem. 38 (1995) 1060e
1066.
The authors are grateful to Department of Chemistry, Sau-
rashtra University, Rajkot, India for providing necessary infra-
structural facilities for carrying out synthetic work, and Dr.
Cecil Kwong, TAACF, USA for anti-tubercular activity of the
compounds. Atul Manvar is thankful to Department of Science
[21] B.L. Bush, R.B. Nachbar, J. Comput.-Aided. Mol. Des. 7 (1993) 587e619.
[22] R.D. Cramer III, J.D. Bunce, D.E. Patterson, I.E. Frank, Quant. Struct.
Act. Relat. 7 (1988) 18e25.
[23] M. Clark, R.D. Cramer, D.M. Jones, D.E. Patterson, P.E. Simeroth,
Tetrahedron Comput. Methodol. 3 (1990) 47e59.