RESUMO
Two three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D-QSAR) methods, comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA) and hypothetical active site lattice (HASL), were compared with respect to the analysis of a training set of 154 artemisinin analogues. Five models were created, including a complete HASL and two trimmed versions, as well as two CoMFA models (leave-one-out standard CoMFA and the guided-region selection protocol). Similar r2 and q2 values were obtained by each method, although some striking differences existed between CoMFA contour maps and the HASL output. Each of the four predictive models exhibited a similar ability to predict the activity of a test set of 23 artemisinin analogues, although some differences were noted as to which compounds were described well by either model.
