Literature DB >> 20939789

Accounting for induced-fit effects in docking: what is possible and what is not?

Christoph A Sotriffer1.   

Abstract

Proteins can undergo a variety of conformational changes upon ligand binding. Although different mechanisms may play a role, the phenomenon is commonly referred to as induced fit to indicate that the tight structural complementarity of the interaction partners is a consequence of the binding event. Docking methods need to take into account this ability of the ligand and the protein to mutually adapt to each other when forming a complex. Handling the ligand as flexible is already common practice in docking applications. This is not yet the case for the protein. In fact, the accurate prediction of protein conformational changes upon ligand binding is still a major challenge, even more if computational speed is an issue, as for example in virtual screening applications. However, significant progress has been made over the past years and many valuable approaches have become available to address the protein flexibility problem and to provide more reliable docking predictions for complexes governed by significant induced-fit effects. This review provides a brief overview of the current situation, the most recent advances, and the remaining limitations of flexible protein docking, with particular focus on approaches handling protein flexibility simultaneously with ligand placement in the docking process.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 20939789     DOI: 10.2174/156802611794863544

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Top Med Chem        ISSN: 1568-0266            Impact factor:   3.295


  20 in total

1.  Utilizing experimental data for reducing ensemble size in flexible-protein docking.

Authors:  Mengang Xu; Markus A Lill
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-12-19       Impact factor: 4.956

2.  Exploring Binding Mechanisms in Nuclear Hormone Receptors by Monte Carlo and X-ray-derived Motions.

Authors:  Christoph Grebner; Daniel Lecina; Victor Gil; Johan Ulander; Pia Hansson; Anita Dellsen; Christian Tyrchan; Karl Edman; Anders Hogner; Victor Guallar
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2017-03-28       Impact factor: 4.033

Review 3.  Efficient incorporation of protein flexibility and dynamics into molecular docking simulations.

Authors:  Markus A Lill
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2011-06-22       Impact factor: 3.162

Review 4.  Induced fit docking, and the use of QM/MM methods in docking.

Authors:  Mengang Xu; Markus A Lill
Journal:  Drug Discov Today Technol       Date:  2013-09

5.  The Fundamental Role of Flexibility on the Strength of Molecular Binding.

Authors:  Christopher Forrey; Jack F Douglas; Michael K Gilson
Journal:  Soft Matter       Date:  2012-05-14       Impact factor: 3.679

6.  Significant enhancement of docking sensitivity using implicit ligand sampling.

Authors:  Mengang Xu; Markus A Lill
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 7.  Protein flexibility in docking and surface mapping.

Authors:  Katrina W Lexa; Heather A Carlson
Journal:  Q Rev Biophys       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 5.318

8.  Predicting Accurate Lead Structures for Screening Molecular Libraries: A Quantum Crystallographic Approach.

Authors:  Suman Kumar Mandal; Parthapratim Munshi
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 4.411

Review 9.  Structure-based virtual screening for drug discovery: a problem-centric review.

Authors:  Tiejun Cheng; Qingliang Li; Zhigang Zhou; Yanli Wang; Stephen H Bryant
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 4.009

10.  "Gate-keeper" residues and active-site rearrangements in DNA polymerase μ help discriminate non-cognate nucleotides.

Authors:  Yunlang Li; Tamar Schlick
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.