Literature DB >> 23879197

Structural properties of non-traditional drug targets present new challenges for virtual screening.

Ragul Gowthaman1, Eric J Deeds, John Karanicolas.   

Abstract

Traditional drug targets have historically included signaling proteins that respond to small molecules and enzymes that use small molecules as substrates. Increasing attention is now being directed toward other types of protein targets, in particular those that exert their function by interacting with nucleic acids or other proteins rather than small-molecule ligands. Here, we systematically compare existing examples of inhibitors of protein-protein interactions to inhibitors of traditional drug targets. While both sets of inhibitors bind with similar potency, we find that the inhibitors of protein-protein interactions typically bury a smaller fraction of their surface area upon binding to their protein targets. The fact that an average atom is less buried suggests that more atoms are needed to achieve a given potency, explaining the observation that ligand efficiency is typically poor for inhibitors of protein-protein interactions. We then carried out a series of docking experiments and found a further consequence of these relatively exposed binding modes is that structure-based virtual screening may be more difficult: such binding modes do not provide sufficient clues to pick out active compounds from decoy compounds. Collectively, these results suggest that the challenges associated with such non-traditional drug targets may not lie with identifying compounds that potently bind to the target protein surface, but rather with identifying compounds that bind in a sufficiently buried manner to achieve good ligand efficiency and, thus, good oral bioavailability. While the number of available crystal structures of distinct protein interaction sites bound to small-molecule inhibitors is relatively small at present (only 21 such complexes were included in this study), these are sufficient to draw conclusions based on the current state of the field; as additional data accumulate it will be exciting to refine the viewpoint presented here. Even with this limited perspective however, we anticipate that these insights, together with new methods for exploring protein conformational fluctuations, may prove useful for identifying the "low-hanging fruit" among non-traditional targets for therapeutic intervention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23879197      PMCID: PMC3819422          DOI: 10.1021/ci4002316

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


  49 in total

Review 1.  How many drug targets are there?

Authors:  John P Overington; Bissan Al-Lazikani; Andrew L Hopkins
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 84.694

2.  Atomic interactions and profile of small molecules disrupting protein-protein interfaces: the TIMBAL database.

Authors:  Alícia P Higueruelo; Adrian Schreyer; G Richard J Bickerton; Will R Pitt; Colin R Groom; Tom L Blundell
Journal:  Chem Biol Drug Des       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.817

Review 3.  Structure-based druggability assessment--identifying suitable targets for small molecule therapeutics.

Authors:  Eric B Fauman; Brajesh K Rai; Enoch S Huang
Journal:  Curr Opin Chem Biol       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 8.822

4.  Conformer generation with OMEGA: learning from the data set and the analysis of failures.

Authors:  Paul C D Hawkins; Anthony Nicholls
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2012-11-12       Impact factor: 4.956

5.  Structural conservation of druggable hot spots in protein-protein interfaces.

Authors:  Dima Kozakov; David R Hall; Gwo-Yu Chuang; Regina Cencic; Ryan Brenke; Laurie E Grove; Dmitri Beglov; Jerry Pelletier; Adrian Whitty; Sandor Vajda
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-01       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Direct interaction between survivin and Smac/DIABLO is essential for the anti-apoptotic activity of survivin during taxol-induced apoptosis.

Authors:  Zhiyin Song; Xuebiao Yao; Mian Wu
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2003-03-26       Impact factor: 5.157

7.  Differences between high- and low-affinity complexes of enzymes and nonenzymes.

Authors:  Heather A Carlson; Richard D Smith; Nickolay A Khazanov; Paul D Kirchhoff; James B Dunbar; Mark L Benson
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 7.446

8.  Directory of useful decoys, enhanced (DUD-E): better ligands and decoys for better benchmarking.

Authors:  Michael M Mysinger; Michael Carchia; John J Irwin; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 7.446

9.  RNA-binding protein Musashi1 modulates glioma cell growth through the post-transcriptional regulation of Notch and PI3 kinase/Akt signaling pathways.

Authors:  Jun Muto; Takao Imai; Daisuke Ogawa; Yoshinori Nishimoto; Yohei Okada; Yo Mabuchi; Takeshi Kawase; Akio Iwanami; Paul S Mischel; Hideyuki Saya; Kazunari Yoshida; Yumi Matsuzaki; Hideyuki Okano
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Druggable protein interaction sites are more predisposed to surface pocket formation than the rest of the protein surface.

Authors:  David K Johnson; John Karanicolas
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  11 in total

1.  Comparative evaluation of several docking tools for docking small molecule ligands to DC-SIGN.

Authors:  Gregor Jug; Marko Anderluh; Tihomir Tomašič
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 1.810

2.  "Solvent hydrogen-bond occlusion": A new model of polar desolvation for biomolecular energetics.

Authors:  Andrea Bazzoli; John Karanicolas
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 3.376

3.  When Does Chemical Elaboration Induce a Ligand To Change Its Binding Mode?

Authors:  Shipra Malhotra; John Karanicolas
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 7.446

4.  Ultra-High-Throughput Structure-Based Virtual Screening for Small-Molecule Inhibitors of Protein-Protein Interactions.

Authors:  David K Johnson; John Karanicolas
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 4.956

5.  DARC: Mapping Surface Topography by Ray-Casting for Effective Virtual Screening at Protein Interaction Sites.

Authors:  Ragul Gowthaman; Sven A Miller; Steven Rogers; Jittasak Khowsathit; Lan Lan; Nan Bai; David K Johnson; Chunjing Liu; Liang Xu; Asokan Anbanandam; Jeffrey Aubé; Anuradha Roy; John Karanicolas
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2015-07-10       Impact factor: 7.446

6.  Inhibition of protein interactions: co-crystalized protein-protein interfaces are nearly as good as holo proteins in rigid-body ligand docking.

Authors:  Saveliy Belkin; Petras J Kundrotas; Ilya A Vakser
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2018-07-12       Impact factor: 3.686

7.  DARC 2.0: Improved Docking and Virtual Screening at Protein Interaction Sites.

Authors:  Ragul Gowthaman; Sergey Lyskov; John Karanicolas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-16       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Enhancements to the Rosetta Energy Function Enable Improved Identification of Small Molecules that Inhibit Protein-Protein Interactions.

Authors:  Andrea Bazzoli; Simon P Kelow; John Karanicolas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Drug-Like Protein-Protein Interaction Modulators: Challenges and Opportunities for Drug Discovery and Chemical Biology.

Authors:  Bruno O Villoutreix; Melaine A Kuenemann; Jean-Luc Poyet; Heriberto Bruzzoni-Giovanelli; Céline Labbé; David Lagorce; Olivier Sperandio; Maria A Miteva
Journal:  Mol Inform       Date:  2014-06-02       Impact factor: 3.353

10.  The scoring bias in reverse docking and the score normalization strategy to improve success rate of target fishing.

Authors:  Qiyao Luo; Liang Zhao; Jianxing Hu; Hongwei Jin; Zhenming Liu; Liangren Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.