Literature DB >> 19416920

Docking for fragment inhibitors of AmpC beta-lactamase.

Denise G Teotico1, Kerim Babaoglu, Gabriel J Rocklin, Rafaela S Ferreira, Anthony M Giannetti, Brian K Shoichet.   

Abstract

Fragment screens for new ligands have had wide success, notwithstanding their constraint to libraries of 1,000-10,000 molecules. Larger libraries would be addressable were molecular docking reliable for fragment screens, but this has not been widely accepted. To investigate docking's ability to prioritize fragments, a library of >137,000 such molecules were docked against the structure of beta-lactamase. Forty-eight fragments highly ranked by docking were acquired and tested; 23 had K(i) values ranging from 0.7 to 9.2 mM. X-ray crystal structures of the enzyme-bound complexes were determined for 8 of the fragments. For 4, the correspondence between the predicted and experimental structures was high (RMSD between 1.2 and 1.4 A), whereas for another 2, the fidelity was lower but retained most key interactions (RMSD 2.4-2.6 A). Two of the 8 fragments adopted very different poses in the active site owing to enzyme conformational changes. The 48% hit rate of the fragment docking compares very favorably with "lead-like" docking and high-throughput screening against the same enzyme. To understand this, we investigated the occurrence of the fragment scaffolds among larger, lead-like molecules. Approximately 1% of commercially available fragments contain these inhibitors whereas only 10(-7)% of lead-like molecules do. This suggests that many more chemotypes and combinations of chemotypes are present among fragments than are available among lead-like molecules, contributing to the higher hit rates. The ability of docking to prioritize these fragments suggests that the technique can be used to exploit the better chemotype coverage that exists at the fragment level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19416920      PMCID: PMC2671983          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0813029106

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  27 in total

Review 1.  Analysis of the binding surfaces of proteins.

Authors:  D Ringe; C Mattos
Journal:  Med Res Rev       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 12.944

2.  Diversity and coverage of structural sublibraries selected using the SAGE and SCA algorithms.

Authors:  C H Reynolds; A Tropsha; L B Pfahler; R Druker; S Chakravorty; G Ethiraj; W Zheng
Journal:  J Chem Inf Comput Sci       Date:  2001 Nov-Dec

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.  Identification of a lead small-molecule inhibitor of the Aurora kinases using a structure-assisted, fragment-based approach.

Authors:  Steven L Warner; Sridevi Bashyam; Hariprasad Vankayalapati; David J Bearss; Haiyong Han; Daruka Mahadevan; Daniel D Von Hoff; Laurence H Hurley
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 6.261

5.  Identification of nonpeptide CCR5 receptor agonists by structure-based virtual screening.

Authors:  Esther Kellenberger; Jean-Yves Springael; Marc Parmentier; Muriel Hachet-Haas; Jean-Luc Galzi; Didier Rognan
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2007-02-21       Impact factor: 7.446

Review 6.  Locating and characterizing binding sites on proteins.

Authors:  C Mattos; D Ringe
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 54.908

7.  The deacylation mechanism of AmpC beta-lactamase at ultrahigh resolution.

Authors:  Yu Chen; George Minasov; Tomer A Roth; Fabio Prati; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2006-03-08       Impact factor: 15.419

8.  Discovery of cell-permeable non-peptide inhibitors of beta-secretase by high-throughput docking and continuum electrostatics calculations.

Authors:  Danzhi Huang; Urs Lüthi; Peter Kolb; Karin Edler; Marco Cecchini; Stephan Audetat; Alcide Barberis; Amedeo Caflisch
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2005-08-11       Impact factor: 7.446

9.  Scaffold topologies. 2. Analysis of chemical databases.

Authors:  Michael J Wester; Sara N Pollock; Evangelos A Coutsias; Tharun Kumar Allu; Sorel Muresan; Tudor I Oprea
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2008-07-08       Impact factor: 4.956

10.  Identification of N-(4-piperidinyl)-4-(2,6-dichlorobenzoylamino)-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide (AT7519), a novel cyclin dependent kinase inhibitor using fragment-based X-ray crystallography and structure based drug design.

Authors:  Paul G Wyatt; Andrew J Woodhead; Valerio Berdini; John A Boulstridge; Maria G Carr; David M Cross; Deborah J Davis; Lindsay A Devine; Theresa R Early; Ruth E Feltell; E Jonathan Lewis; Rachel L McMenamin; Eva F Navarro; Michael A O'Brien; Marc O'Reilly; Matthias Reule; Gordon Saxty; Lisa C A Seavers; Donna-Michelle Smith; Matt S Squires; Gary Trewartha; Margaret T Walker; Alison J-A Woolford
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2008-07-26       Impact factor: 7.446

View more
  43 in total

1.  Computational fragment-based screening using RosettaLigand: the SAMPL3 challenge.

Authors:  Ashutosh Kumar; Kam Y J Zhang
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2012-01-15       Impact factor: 3.686

Review 2.  Structure-based discovery of antibacterial drugs.

Authors:  Katie J Simmons; Ian Chopra; Colin W G Fishwick
Journal:  Nat Rev Microbiol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 60.633

3.  Integrated biophysical approach to fragment screening and validation for fragment-based lead discovery.

Authors:  Hernani Leonardo Silvestre; Thomas L Blundell; Chris Abell; Alessio Ciulli
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 4.  Docking Screens for Novel Ligands Conferring New Biology.

Authors:  John J Irwin; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 7.446

5.  Second-generation de novo design: a view from a medicinal chemist perspective.

Authors:  Andrea Zaliani; Krisztina Boda; Thomas Seidel; Achim Herwig; Christof H Schwab; Johann Gasteiger; Holger Claussen; Christian Lemmen; Jörg Degen; Juri Pärn; Matthias Rarey
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2009-06-27       Impact factor: 3.686

6.  Ligand deconstruction: Why some fragment binding positions are conserved and others are not.

Authors:  Dima Kozakov; David R Hall; Stefan Jehle; Sefan Jehle; Lingqi Luo; Stefan O Ochiana; Elizabeth V Jones; Michael Pollastri; Karen N Allen; Adrian Whitty; Sandor Vajda
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Dynamic undocking and the quasi-bound state as tools for drug discovery.

Authors:  Sergio Ruiz-Carmona; Peter Schmidtke; F Javier Luque; Lisa Baker; Natalia Matassova; Ben Davis; Stephen Roughley; James Murray; Rod Hubbard; Xavier Barril
Journal:  Nat Chem       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 24.427

8.  A virtual screen discovers novel, fragment-sized inhibitors of Mycobacterium tuberculosis InhA.

Authors:  Alexander L Perryman; Weixuan Yu; Xin Wang; Sean Ekins; Stefano Forli; Shao-Gang Li; Joel S Freundlich; Peter J Tonge; Arthur J Olson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2015-02-17       Impact factor: 4.956

9.  DOCK 6: Impact of new features and current docking performance.

Authors:  William J Allen; Trent E Balius; Sudipto Mukherjee; Scott R Brozell; Demetri T Moustakas; P Therese Lang; David A Case; Irwin D Kuntz; Robert C Rizzo
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 3.376

10.  Virtual fragment screening for novel inhibitors of 6-phosphogluconate dehydrogenase.

Authors:  Gian Filippo Ruda; Gordon Campbell; Vincent P Alibu; Michael P Barrett; Ruth Brenk; Ian H Gilbert
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 3.641

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.