Literature DB >> 22225808

Discrete molecular dynamics distinguishes nativelike binding poses from decoys in difficult targets.

Elizabeth A Proctor1, Shuangye Yin, Alexander Tropsha, Nikolay V Dokholyan.   

Abstract

Virtual screening is one of the major tools used in computer-aided drug discovery. In structure-based virtual screening, the scoring function is critical to identifying the correct docking pose and accurately predicting the binding affinities of compounds. However, the performance of existing scoring functions has been shown to be uneven for different targets, and some important drug targets have proven especially challenging. In these targets, scoring functions cannot accurately identify the native or near-native binding pose of the ligand from among decoy poses, which affects both the accuracy of the binding affinity prediction and the ability of virtual screening to identify true binders in chemical libraries. Here, we present an approach to discriminating native poses from decoys in difficult targets for which several scoring functions failed to correctly identify the native pose. Our approach employs Discrete Molecular Dynamics simulations to incorporate protein-ligand dynamics and the entropic effects of binding. We analyze a collection of poses generated by docking and find that the residence time of the ligand in the native and nativelike binding poses is distinctly longer than that in decoy poses. This finding suggests that molecular simulations offer a unique approach to distinguishing the native (or nativelike) binding pose from decoy poses that cannot be distinguished using scoring functions that evaluate static structures. The success of our method emphasizes the importance of protein-ligand dynamics in the accurate determination of the binding pose, an aspect that is not addressed in typical docking and scoring protocols.
Copyright © 2012 Biophysical Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22225808      PMCID: PMC3250674          DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2011.11.4008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biophys J        ISSN: 0006-3495            Impact factor:   4.033


  31 in total

1.  Direct molecular dynamics observation of protein folding transition state ensemble.

Authors:  Feng Ding; Nikolay V Dokholyan; Sergey V Buldyrev; H Eugene Stanley; Eugene I Shakhnovich
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy.

Authors:  Richard A Friesner; Jay L Banks; Robert B Murphy; Thomas A Halgren; Jasna J Klicic; Daniel T Mainz; Matthew P Repasky; Eric H Knoll; Mee Shelley; Jason K Perry; David E Shaw; Perry Francis; Peter S Shenkin
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-03-25       Impact factor: 7.446

3.  Single-molecule pulling simulations can discern active from inactive enzyme inhibitors.

Authors:  Francesco Colizzi; Remo Perozzo; Leonardo Scapozza; Maurizio Recanatini; Andrea Cavalli
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 15.419

Review 4.  Challenges and advances in computational docking: 2009 in review.

Authors:  Elizabeth Yuriev; Mark Agostino; Paul A Ramsland
Journal:  J Mol Recognit       Date:  2010-10-23       Impact factor: 2.137

5.  sc-PDB: a database for identifying variations and multiplicity of 'druggable' binding sites in proteins.

Authors:  Jamel Meslamani; Didier Rognan; Esther Kellenberger
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-03-12       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  Thermodynamics of ligand binding and efficiency.

Authors:  Charles H Reynolds; M Katharine Holloway
Journal:  ACS Med Chem Lett       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 4.345

7.  AutoDock4 and AutoDockTools4: Automated docking with selective receptor flexibility.

Authors:  Garrett M Morris; Ruth Huey; William Lindstrom; Michel F Sanner; Richard K Belew; David S Goodsell; Arthur J Olson
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.376

8.  Ab initio folding of proteins with all-atom discrete molecular dynamics.

Authors:  Feng Ding; Douglas Tsao; Huifen Nie; Nikolay V Dokholyan
Journal:  Structure       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 5.006

9.  Consistent improvement of cross-docking results using binding site ensembles generated with elastic network normal modes.

Authors:  Manuel Rueda; Giovanni Bottegoni; Ruben Abagyan
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 10.  Lessons from structural genomics.

Authors:  Thomas C Terwilliger; David Stuart; Shigeyuki Yokoyama
Journal:  Annu Rev Biophys       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 12.981

View more
  11 in total

1.  Identification of novel integrin binding partners for calcium and integrin binding protein 1 (CIB1): structural and thermodynamic basis of CIB1 promiscuity.

Authors:  Thomas C Freeman; Justin L Black; Holly G Bray; Onur Dagliyan; Yi I Wu; Ashutosh Tripathy; Nikolay V Dokholyan; Tina M Leisner; Leslie V Parise
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 3.162

2.  MedusaDock 2.0: Efficient and Accurate Protein-Ligand Docking With Constraints.

Authors:  Jian Wang; Nikolay V Dokholyan
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2019-04-17       Impact factor: 4.956

3.  Machine learning accelerates MD-based binding pose prediction between ligands and proteins.

Authors:  Kei Terayama; Hiroaki Iwata; Mitsugu Araki; Yasushi Okuno; Koji Tsuda
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  Hydrophobic/Hydrophilic Ratio of Amphiphilic Helix Mimetics Determines the Effects on Islet Amyloid Polypeptide Aggregation.

Authors:  Huayuan Tang; Yunxiang Sun; Feng Ding
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 6.162

5.  The Development of Target-Specific Pose Filter Ensembles To Boost Ligand Enrichment for Structure-Based Virtual Screening.

Authors:  Jie Xia; Jui-Hua Hsieh; Huabin Hu; Song Wu; Xiang Simon Wang
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 6.  Recent advances in employing molecular modelling to determine the specificity of glycan-binding proteins.

Authors:  Oliver C Grant; Robert J Woods
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 6.809

Review 7.  Applications of Discrete Molecular Dynamics in biology and medicine.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Proctor; Nikolay V Dokholyan
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2015-11-28       Impact factor: 6.809

Review 8.  The role of molecular simulations in the development of inhibitors of amyloid β-peptide aggregation for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Justin A Lemkul; David R Bevan
Journal:  ACS Chem Neurosci       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 4.418

9.  Rational design of small-molecule stabilizers of spermine synthase dimer by virtual screening and free energy-based approach.

Authors:  Zhe Zhang; Virginie Martiny; David Lagorce; Yoshihiko Ikeguchi; Emil Alexov; Maria A Miteva
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-23       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Predicting the Origins of Anti-Blood Group Antibody Specificity: A Case Study of the ABO A- and B-Antigens.

Authors:  Spandana Makeneni; Ye Ji; David C Watson; N Martin Young; Robert J Woods
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2014-08-22       Impact factor: 7.561

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.