Literature DB >> 21766923

Comparison of enveloping distribution sampling and thermodynamic integration to calculate binding free energies of phenylethanolamine N-methyltransferase inhibitors.

Sereina Riniker1, Clara D Christ, Niels Hansen, Alan E Mark, Pramod C Nair, Wilfred F van Gunsteren.   

Abstract

The relative binding free energy between two ligands to a specific protein can be obtained using various computational methods. The more accurate and also computationally more demanding techniques are the so-called free energy methods which use conformational sampling from molecular dynamics or Monte Carlo simulations to generate thermodynamic averages. Two such widely applied methods are the thermodynamic integration (TI) and the recently introduced enveloping distribution sampling (EDS) methods. In both cases relative binding free energies are obtained through the alchemical perturbations of one ligand into another in water and inside the binding pocket of the protein. TI requires many separate simulations and the specification of a pathway along which the system is perturbed from one ligand to another. Using the EDS approach, only a single automatically derived reference state enveloping both end states needs to be sampled. In addition, the choice of an optimal pathway in TI calculations is not trivial and a poor choice may lead to poor convergence along the pathway. Given this, EDS is expected to be a valuable and computationally efficient alternative to TI. In this study, the performances of these two methods are compared using the binding of ten tetrahydroisoquinoline derivatives to phenylethanolamine N-transferase as an example. The ligands involve a diverse set of functional groups leading to a wide range of free energy differences. In addition, two different schemes to determine automatically the EDS reference state parameters and two different topology approaches are compared.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21766923     DOI: 10.1063/1.3604534

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Phys        ISSN: 0021-9606            Impact factor:   3.488


  14 in total

1.  Approaching protein design with multisite λ dynamics: Accurate and scalable mutational folding free energies in T4 lysozyme.

Authors:  Ryan L Hayes; Jonah Z Vilseck; Charles L Brooks
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 6.725

2.  Perspective: Alchemical free energy calculations for drug discovery.

Authors:  David L Mobley; Pavel V Klimovich
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Separated topologies--a method for relative binding free energy calculations using orientational restraints.

Authors:  Gabriel J Rocklin; David L Mobley; Ken A Dill
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 3.488

4.  Adaptive Landscape Flattening Accelerates Sampling of Alchemical Space in Multisite λ Dynamics.

Authors:  Ryan L Hayes; Kira A Armacost; Jonah Z Vilseck; Charles L Brooks
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 2.991

5.  Replica-Exchange Enveloping Distribution Sampling Using Generalized AMBER Force-Field Topologies: Application to Relative Hydration Free-Energy Calculations for Large Sets of Molecules.

Authors:  Salomé R Rieder; Benjamin Ries; Kay Schaller; Candide Champion; Emilia P Barros; Philippe H Hünenberger; Sereina Riniker
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2022-06-08       Impact factor: 6.162

6.  Gibbs Sampler-Based λ-Dynamics and Rao-Blackwell Estimator for Alchemical Free Energy Calculation.

Authors:  Xinqiang Ding; Jonah Z Vilseck; Ryan L Hayes; Charles L Brooks
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 6.006

7.  Free enthalpies of replacing water molecules in protein binding pockets.

Authors:  Sereina Riniker; Luzi J Barandun; François Diederich; Oliver Krämer; Andreas Steffen; Wilfred F van Gunsteren
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 3.686

8.  Enhanced Sampling in Free Energy Calculations: Combining SGLD with the Bennett's Acceptance Ratio and Enveloping Distribution Sampling Methods.

Authors:  Gerhard König; Benjamin T Miller; Stefan Boresch; Xiongwu Wu; Bernard R Brooks
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 6.006

9.  Improving the Efficiency of Free Energy Calculations in the Amber Molecular Dynamics Package.

Authors:  Joseph W Kaus; Levi T Pierce; Ross C Walker; J Andrew McCammont
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 6.006

10.  Dummy Atoms in Alchemical Free Energy Calculations.

Authors:  Markus Fleck; Marcus Wieder; Stefan Boresch
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 6.006

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.