Literature DB >> 21644546

Evaluation of several two-step scoring functions based on linear interaction energy, effective ligand size, and empirical pair potentials for prediction of protein-ligand binding geometry and free energy.

Obaidur Rahaman1, Trilce P Estrada, Douglas J Doren, Michela Taufer, Charles L Brooks, Roger S Armen.   

Abstract

The performances of several two-step scoring approaches for molecular docking were assessed for their ability to predict binding geometries and free energies. Two new scoring functions designed for "step 2 discrimination" were proposed and compared to our CHARMM implementation of the linear interaction energy (LIE) approach using the Generalized-Born with Molecular Volume (GBMV) implicit solvation model. A scoring function S1 was proposed by considering only "interacting" ligand atoms as the "effective size" of the ligand and extended to an empirical regression-based pair potential S2. The S1 and S2 scoring schemes were trained and 5-fold cross-validated on a diverse set of 259 protein-ligand complexes from the Ligand Protein Database (LPDB). The regression-based parameters for S1 and S2 also demonstrated reasonable transferability in the CSARdock 2010 benchmark using a new data set (NRC HiQ) of diverse protein-ligand complexes. The ability of the scoring functions to accurately predict ligand geometry was evaluated by calculating the discriminative power (DP) of the scoring functions to identify native poses. The parameters for the LIE scoring function with the optimal discriminative power (DP) for geometry (step 1 discrimination) were found to be very similar to the best-fit parameters for binding free energy over a large number of protein-ligand complexes (step 2 discrimination). Reasonable performance of the scoring functions in enrichment of active compounds in four different protein target classes established that the parameters for S1 and S2 provided reasonable accuracy and transferability. Additional analysis was performed to definitively separate scoring function performance from molecular weight effects. This analysis included the prediction of ligand binding efficiencies for a subset of the CSARdock NRC HiQ data set where the number of ligand heavy atoms ranged from 17 to 35. This range of ligand heavy atoms is where improved accuracy of predicted ligand efficiencies is most relevant to real-world drug design efforts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21644546      PMCID: PMC3183351          DOI: 10.1021/ci1003009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Inf Model        ISSN: 1549-9596            Impact factor:   4.956


  33 in total

1.  Further development and validation of empirical scoring functions for structure-based binding affinity prediction.

Authors:  Renxiao Wang; Luhua Lai; Shaomeng Wang
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment.

Authors:  Marcel L Verdonk; Valerio Berdini; Michael J Hartshorn; Wijnand T M Mooij; Christopher W Murray; Richard D Taylor; Paul Watson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Comput Sci       Date:  2004 May-Jun

3.  Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions.

Authors:  Philippe Ferrara; Holger Gohlke; Daniel J Price; Gerhard Klebe; Charles L Brooks
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-06-03       Impact factor: 7.446

4.  An extensive test of 14 scoring functions using the PDBbind refined set of 800 protein-ligand complexes.

Authors:  Renxiao Wang; Yipin Lu; Xueliang Fang; Shaomeng Wang
Journal:  J Chem Inf Comput Sci       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec

5.  In silico discovery of beta-secretase inhibitors.

Authors:  Danzhi Huang; Urs Lüthi; Peter Kolb; Marco Cecchini; Alcide Barberis; Amedeo Caflisch
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2006-04-26       Impact factor: 15.419

6.  Discovery of kinase inhibitors by high-throughput docking and scoring based on a transferable linear interaction energy model.

Authors:  Peter Kolb; Danzhi Huang; Fabian Dey; Amedeo Caflisch
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 7.446

7.  Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes.

Authors:  M D Eldridge; C W Murray; T R Auton; G V Paolini; R P Mee
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 3.686

8.  Docking enzyme-inhibitor complexes using a preference-based free-energy surface.

Authors:  A Wallqvist; D G Covell
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1996-08

9.  A new method for predicting binding affinity in computer-aided drug design.

Authors:  J Aqvist; C Medina; J E Samuelsson
Journal:  Protein Eng       Date:  1994-03

Review 10.  How to do an evaluation: pitfalls and traps.

Authors:  Paul C D Hawkins; Gregory L Warren; A Geoffrey Skillman; Anthony Nicholls
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 3.686

View more
  11 in total

1.  Structural basis for selective inhibition of Cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) by diarylisoxazoles mofezolac and 3-(5-chlorofuran-2-yl)-5-methyl-4-phenylisoxazole (P6).

Authors:  Gino Cingolani; Andrea Panella; Maria Grazia Perrone; Paola Vitale; Giuseppe Di Mauro; Cosimo G Fortuna; Roger S Armen; Savina Ferorelli; William L Smith; Antonio Scilimati
Journal:  Eur J Med Chem       Date:  2017-06-24       Impact factor: 6.514

2.  A tripartite cooperative mechanism confers resistance of the protein kinase A catalytic subunit to dephosphorylation.

Authors:  Tung O Chan; Roger S Armen; Santosh Yadav; Sushrut Shah; Jin Zhang; Brian C Tiegs; Nikhil Keny; Brian Blumhof; Deepak A Deshpande; Ulrich Rodeck; Raymond B Penn
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 5.157

3.  Prediction of consensus binding mode geometries for related chemical series of positive allosteric modulators of adenosine and muscarinic acetylcholine receptors.

Authors:  Leon A Sakkal; Kyle Z Rajkowski; Roger S Armen
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2017-01-28       Impact factor: 3.376

4.  Akt kinase C-terminal modifications control activation loop dephosphorylation and enhance insulin response.

Authors:  Tung O Chan; Jin Zhang; Brian C Tiegs; Brian Blumhof; Linda Yan; Nikhil Keny; Morgan Penny; Xue Li; John M Pascal; Roger S Armen; Ulrich Rodeck; Raymond B Penn
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 3.857

5.  Optimal strategies for virtual screening of induced-fit and flexible target in the 2015 D3R Grand Challenge.

Authors:  Zhaofeng Ye; Matthew P Baumgartner; Bentley M Wingert; Carlos J Camacho
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2016-08-29       Impact factor: 3.686

6.  CSAR benchmark exercise of 2010: combined evaluation across all submitted scoring functions.

Authors:  Richard D Smith; James B Dunbar; Peter Man-Un Ung; Emilio X Esposito; Chao-Yie Yang; Shaomeng Wang; Heather A Carlson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-08-29       Impact factor: 4.956

7.  Application of consensus scoring and principal component analysis for virtual screening against β-secretase (BACE-1).

Authors:  Shu Liu; Rao Fu; Li-Hua Zhou; Sheng-Ping Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A conservation and biophysics guided stochastic approach to refining docked multimeric proteins.

Authors:  Bahar Akbal-Delibas; Nurit Haspel
Journal:  BMC Struct Biol       Date:  2013-11-08

Review 9.  Structural Implications for Selective Targeting of PARPs.

Authors:  Jamin D Steffen; Jonathan R Brody; Roger S Armen; John M Pascal
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 6.244

10.  Identification of the functional binding pocket for compounds targeting small-conductance Ca²⁺-activated potassium channels.

Authors:  Miao Zhang; John M Pascal; Marcel Schumann; Roger S Armen; Ji-Fang Zhang
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 14.919

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.