Literature DB >> 12825621

Distilling the essential features of a protein surface for improving protein-ligand docking, scoring, and virtual screening.

Maria I Zavodszky1, Paul C Sanschagrin, Rajesh S Korde, Leslie A Kuhn.   

Abstract

For the successful identification and docking of new ligands to a protein target by virtual screening, the essential features of the protein and ligand surfaces must be captured and distilled in an efficient representation. Since the running time for docking increases exponentially with the number of points representing the protein and each ligand candidate, it is important to place these points where the best interactions can be made between the protein and the ligand. This definition of favorable points of interaction can also guide protein structure-based ligand design, which typically focuses on which chemical groups provide the most energetically favorable contacts. In this paper, we present an alternative method of protein template and ligand interaction point design that identifies the most favorable points for making hydrophobic and hydrogen-bond interactions by using a knowledge base. The knowledge-based protein and ligand representations have been incorporated in version 2.0 of SLIDE and resulted in dockings closer to the crystal structure orientations when screening a set of 57 known thrombin and glutathione S-transferase (GST) ligands against the apo structures of these proteins. There was also improved scoring enrichment of the dockings, meaning better differentiation between the chemically diverse known ligands and a approximately 15,000-molecule dataset of randomly-chosen small organic molecules. This approach for identifying the most important points of interaction between proteins and their ligands can equally well be used in other docking and design techniques. While much recent effort has focused on improving scoring functions for protein-ligand docking, our results indicate that improving the representation of the chemistry of proteins and their ligands is another avenue that can lead to significant improvements in the identification, docking, and scoring of ligands.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12825621     DOI: 10.1023/a:1023866311551

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des        ISSN: 0920-654X            Impact factor:   3.686


  42 in total

1.  The Protein Data Bank.

Authors:  H M Berman; J Westbrook; Z Feng; G Gilliland; T N Bhat; H Weissig; I N Shindyalov; P E Bourne
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2000-01-01       Impact factor: 16.971

2.  Consensus scoring: A method for obtaining improved hit rates from docking databases of three-dimensional structures into proteins.

Authors:  P S Charifson; J J Corkery; M A Murcko; W P Walters
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  1999-12-16       Impact factor: 7.446

3.  Comparison of two implementations of the incremental construction algorithm in flexible docking of thrombin inhibitors.

Authors:  R M Knegtel; D M Bayada; R A Engh; W von der Saal; V J van Geerestein; P D Grootenhuis
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  Screening a peptidyl database for potential ligands to proteins with side-chain flexibility.

Authors:  V Schnecke; C A Swanson; E D Getzoff; J A Tainer; L A Kuhn
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1998-10-01

5.  Predicting conserved water-mediated and polar ligand interactions in proteins using a K-nearest-neighbors genetic algorithm.

Authors:  M L Raymer; P C Sanschagrin; W F Punch; S Venkataraman; E D Goodman; L A Kuhn
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1997-01-31       Impact factor: 5.469

6.  Automatic identification and representation of protein binding sites for molecular docking.

Authors:  J Ruppert; W Welch; A N Jain
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 6.725

7.  Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking.

Authors:  G Jones; P Willett; R C Glen; A R Leach; R Taylor
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1997-04-04       Impact factor: 5.469

8.  Surface motifs by a computer vision technique: searches, detection, and implications for protein-ligand recognition.

Authors:  D Fischer; R Norel; H Wolfson; R Nussinov
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1993-07

9.  Molecular recognition of receptor sites using a genetic algorithm with a description of desolvation.

Authors:  G Jones; P Willett; R C Glen
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1995-01-06       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  New hydrogen-bond potentials for use in determining energetically favorable binding sites on molecules of known structure.

Authors:  D N Boobbyer; P J Goodford; P M McWhinnie; R C Wade
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 7.446

View more
  30 in total

1.  Gaussian mapping of chemical fragments in ligand binding sites.

Authors:  Kun Wang; Marta Murcia; Pere Constans; Carlos Pérez; Angel R Ortiz
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Computer-aided drug design platform using PyMOL.

Authors:  Markus A Lill; Matthew L Danielson
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2010-10-30       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  ZINC--a free database of commercially available compounds for virtual screening.

Authors:  John J Irwin; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.956

4.  Side-chain flexibility in protein-ligand binding: the minimal rotation hypothesis.

Authors:  Maria I Zavodszky; Leslie A Kuhn
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  ProPose: a docking engine based on a fully configurable protein-ligand interaction model.

Authors:  Markus H J Seifert; Frank Schmitt; Thomas Herz; Bernd Kramer
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2004-10-08       Impact factor: 1.810

6.  IA, database of known ligands of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases.

Authors:  Mieczyslaw Torchala; Marcin Hoffmann
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2007-09-20       Impact factor: 3.686

Review 7.  Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection--what can we learn from earlier mistakes?

Authors:  Johannes Kirchmair; Patrick Markt; Simona Distinto; Gerhard Wolber; Thierry Langer
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 3.686

8.  StoneHinge: hinge prediction by network analysis of individual protein structures.

Authors:  Kevin S Keating; Samuel C Flores; Mark B Gerstein; Leslie A Kuhn
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 6.725

9.  Scoring confidence index: statistical evaluation of ligand binding mode predictions.

Authors:  Maria I Zavodszky; Andrew W Stumpff-Kane; David J Lee; Michael Feig
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 3.686

10.  Identification of novel, less toxic PTP-LAR inhibitors using in silico strategies: pharmacophore modeling, SADMET-based virtual screening and docking.

Authors:  Dara Ajay; M Elizabeth Sobhia
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 1.810

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.