Literature DB >> 19340588

Effects of protein conformation in docking: improved pose prediction through protein pocket adaptation.

Ajay N Jain1.   

Abstract

Computational methods for docking ligands have been shown to be remarkably dependent on precise protein conformation, where acceptable results in pose prediction have been generally possible only in the artificial case of re-docking a ligand into a protein binding site whose conformation was determined in the presence of the same ligand (the "cognate" docking problem). In such cases, on well curated protein/ligand complexes, accurate dockings can be returned as top-scoring over 75% of the time using tools such as Surflex-Dock. A critical application of docking in modeling for lead optimization requires accurate pose prediction for novel ligands, ranging from simple synthetic analogs to very different molecular scaffolds. Typical results for widely used programs in the "cross-docking case" (making use of a single fixed protein conformation) have rates closer to 20% success. By making use of protein conformations from multiple complexes, Surflex-Dock yields an average success rate of 61% across eight pharmaceutically relevant targets. Following docking, protein pocket adaptation and rescoring identifies single pose families that are correct an average of 67% of the time. Consideration of the best of two pose families (from alternate scoring regimes) yields a 75% mean success rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19340588      PMCID: PMC2693357          DOI: 10.1007/s10822-009-9266-3

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


  38 in total

1.  Ligand-based structural hypotheses for virtual screening.

Authors:  Ajay N Jain
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-02-12       Impact factor: 7.446

2.  Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine.

Authors:  Ajay N Jain
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2003-02-13       Impact factor: 7.446

3.  A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance.

Authors:  Emanuele Perola; W Patrick Walters; Paul S Charifson
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2004-08-01

4.  Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy.

Authors:  Esther Kellenberger; Jordi Rodrigo; Pascal Muller; Didier Rognan
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2004-11-01

5.  Testing a flexible-receptor docking algorithm in a model binding site.

Authors:  Binqing Q Wei; Larry H Weaver; Anna M Ferrari; Brian W Matthews; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2004-04-09       Impact factor: 5.469

6.  Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases.

Authors:  Claudio N Cavasotto; Ruben A Abagyan
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2004-03-12       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 7.  Automated docking of flexible ligands: applications of AutoDock.

Authors:  D S Goodsell; G M Morris; A J Olson
Journal:  J Mol Recognit       Date:  1996 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.137

8.  A shape-based machine learning tool for drug design.

Authors:  A N Jain; T G Dietterich; R H Lathrop; D Chapman; R E Critchlow; B E Bauer; T A Webster; T Lozano-Perez
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 3.686

9.  The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure.

Authors:  H J Böhm
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 3.686

10.  A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions.

Authors:  I D Kuntz; J M Blaney; S J Oatley; R Langridge; T E Ferrin
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1982-10-25       Impact factor: 5.469

View more
  30 in total

1.  Pose prediction and virtual screening performance of GOLD scoring functions in a standardized test.

Authors:  John W Liebeschuetz; Jason C Cole; Oliver Korb
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Chemical space sampling by different scoring functions and crystal structures.

Authors:  Natasja Brooijmans; Christine Humblet
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2010-04-18       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Biased retrieval of chemical series in receptor-based virtual screening.

Authors:  Natasja Brooijmans; Jason B Cross; Christine Humblet
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2010-10-30       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  Ultrafast protein structure-based virtual screening with Panther.

Authors:  Sanna P Niinivehmas; Kari Salokas; Sakari Lätti; Hannu Raunio; Olli T Pentikäinen
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 3.686

5.  Molecular motions in drug design: the coming age of the metadynamics method.

Authors:  Xevi Biarnés; Salvatore Bongarzone; Attilio Vittorio Vargiu; Paolo Carloni; Paolo Ruggerone
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2011-02-17       Impact factor: 3.686

6.  Negative Image-Based Screening: Rigid Docking Using Cavity Information.

Authors:  Pekka A Postila; Sami T Kurkinen; Olli T Pentikäinen
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2021

7.  Application of binding free energy calculations to prediction of binding modes and affinities of MDM2 and MDMX inhibitors.

Authors:  Hui Sun Lee; Sunhwan Jo; Hyun-Suk Lim; Wonpil Im
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 4.956

8.  Multiple-targeting and conformational selection in the estrogen receptor: computation and experiment.

Authors:  Peng Yuan; Kaiwei Liang; Buyong Ma; Nan Zheng; Ruth Nussinov; Jian Huang
Journal:  Chem Biol Drug Des       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 2.817

9.  Targeting of Hematologic Malignancies with PTC299, A Novel Potent Inhibitor of Dihydroorotate Dehydrogenase with Favorable Pharmaceutical Properties.

Authors:  Liangxian Cao; Marla Weetall; Christopher Trotta; Katherine Cintron; Jiyuan Ma; Min Jung Kim; Bansri Furia; Charles Romfo; Jason D Graci; Wencheng Li; Joshua Du; Josephine Sheedy; Jean Hedrick; Nicole Risher; Shirley Yeh; Hongyan Qi; Tamil Arasu; Seongwoo Hwang; William Lennox; Ronald Kong; Janet Petruska; Young-Choon Moon; John Babiak; Thomas W Davis; Allan Jacobson; Neil G Almstead; Art Branstrom; Joseph M Colacino; Stuart W Peltz
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 6.261

10.  Automated docking screens: a feasibility study.

Authors:  John J Irwin; Brian K Shoichet; Michael M Mysinger; Niu Huang; Francesco Colizzi; Pascal Wassam; Yiqun Cao
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2009-09-24       Impact factor: 7.446

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.