| Literature DB >> 25054154 |
C George Priya Doss1, Chiranjib Chakraborty2, Luonan Chen3, Hailong Zhu4.
Abstract
Over the past decade, advancements in next generation sequencing technology have placed personalized genomic medicine upon horizon. Understanding the likelihood of disease causing mutations in complex diseases as pathogenic or neutral remains as a major task and even impossible in the structural context because of its time consuming and expensive experiments. Among the various diseases causing mutations, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) play a vital role in defining individual's susceptibility to disease and drug response. Understanding the genotype-phenotype relationship through SNPs is the first and most important step in drug research and development. Detailed understanding of the effect of SNPs on patient drug response is a key factor in the establishment of personalized medicine. In this paper, we represent a computational pipeline in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) for SNP-centred study by the application of in silico prediction methods, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics simulation approaches. Combination of computational methods provides a way in understanding the impact of deleterious mutations in altering the protein drug targets and eventually leading to variable patient's drug response. We hope this rapid and cost effective pipeline will also serve as a bridge to connect the clinicians and in silico resources in tailoring treatments to the patients' specific genotype.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25054154 PMCID: PMC4098886 DOI: 10.1155/2014/895831
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Summary of in silico prediction methods, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics simulation approaches in nsSNP analysis.
|
| Website URL |
| SIFT BLink |
|
| PolyPhen 2 |
|
| SNAP |
|
| MutPred |
|
| PANTHER |
|
| nsSNP Analyzer |
|
| PhD-SNP |
|
| Auto-Mute |
|
|
|
|
| Align GVGD |
|
| Mutation Taster |
|
| Provean |
|
| Fathmm |
|
| SNPs3D |
|
| topoSNP |
|
| CanPredict |
|
| LS-SNP/PDB |
|
| KD4v |
|
| Parepro |
|
| F-SNP |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Types of protein simulation | |
| Molecular Dynamics Simulation | Based on their interactions according to the equations of motion defined in classical (i.e., Newtonian) mechanics |
| Langevin Dynamics | Based on use of the Langevin equation as an alternative to Newton's second law |
| Brownian Dynamics | Diffusional analogue of MD carried out through the numerical integration of the Langevin equation |
| Monte Carlo | Stochastic approach under given thermodynamic conditions such as temperature and volume. |
| Simulated Annealing | Find the minimum energy configuration of a system |
| QM/MM | To study of biomolecular reaction mechanisms |
| Nondynamic Methods | Conformational Sampling, Principal Component Analysis |
|
| |
| Tool For MD | |
| Gromacs |
|
| NAMD |
|
| AMBER |
|
| CHARMM |
|
|
| |
| Tools for Modeling and Docking | |
| Chemical structure representations | Zinc Database, ChEMBL, Chemspider, Bingo, JChem for Excel, ChemDiff, Protein DataBank (PDB), Binding MOAD (Mother Of All Database), CREDO, TTD, STITCH, SMPDB |
| Molecular Modeling | CHARMM, GROMACS, Amber, SwissParam, Dundee PRODRG2 Server, PDB2PQR Server, SwissSideChain |
| Homology Modeling | Modeller, I-TASSER, LOMETS, SWISS-MODEL, SWISS-MODEL Repository, Robetta |
| Binding site prediction | MED-SuMo, CAVER, FINDSITE, sc-PDB, CASTp, Pocketome, 3DLigandSite, metaPocket, PocketAnnotate |
| Docking | Autodock, DOCK, GOLD, SwissDock, DockingServer, 1-Click Docking, COPICAT, Computer-Aided Drug-Design Platform using PyMOL, Haddock |
| Visualizing | Visual Molecular Dynamics, PyMOL, UCSF Chimera, Discovery studio |
Figure 1Flow chart for the proposed methodology.
SNPs in the regulatory region found to be functionally significant by FASTSNP.
| SNP ID (rs) | Possible functional effects | Risk | Region |
|---|---|---|---|
| rs73920776 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs57277472 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs73920777 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs6727236 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs12151564 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs4666202 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs4666203 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs55793959 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs13404651 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs4666204 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
| rs6731724 | Promoter/regulatory region | 1–3 | 5upstream |
Interactions of ALK native and mutant models with Crizotinib. AutoDock binding energy, nature of interaction, and participating residues are listed. Distance between drug atoms and residues involved in hydrogen bond is noted.
| Protein model | Binding energy | Hydrogen bonding | Hydrophobic residues | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Kcal/mol) | Residue | Distance (Å) | ||
| Native | −9.21 | Q 1197 | 2.80 | Q 1146, 1196, A 1148, T 1258, L 1198, L L 1256, |
| M 1199 | 1.97 | |||
|
| ||||
| F1174L | −7.34 | Q 1197 | 3.07 | L 1122, A 1148, M 1196, M 1199, A 1200, G 1201, G 1202, R 1253, L 1256. |
|
| ||||
| R1275Q | −8.07 | M 1199 | 3.01 | L 1122, A1148, Q 1197, L 1196, Q 1197 L 1198, A 1200, G 1202, L 1256, R 1253, D 1203, N 1254, D 1270, L 1150. |
Figure 2Residual interactions in the protein-drug interface was analyzed by Ligplot (a) Native (b) Mutant F1174L (c) Mutant R1275Q.
Docking results of ALK with crizotinib using Patchdock.
| RET | Score | ACE |
|---|---|---|
| Native | 6894 | −298.28 |
| F1174L | 5432 | −144.17 |
| R1275Q | 5790 | −176.08 |
Figure 3Analysis of RMSD, RMSF, Rg, and SASA of native and mutant ALK-crizotinib complex at 20000 ps. (a) Time evolution of backbone RMSDs of the native and mutant structures. (b) RMSF of the carbon alpha over the entire simulation. The ordinate is RMSF (nm), and the abscissa is residue. (c) Rg of the protein backbone over the entire simulation. The ordinate is Rg (nm), and the abscissa is residue. (d) The ordinate is SASA (nm2), and the abscissa is time (ns). The symbol coding scheme is as follows: native (green colour), mutant F1174L (red colour), and R1275Q (blue colour).
Figure 4Analysis of intermolecular NH bond of native and mutant ALK-crizotinib complex at 20000 ps. Average number of intermolecular hydrogen bonds in native and mutant versus time. (a) Native, (b) mutant F1174L, and (c) mutant R1275Q.
Figure 5Time evolution of the secondary structural elements of the protein at 300 k (DSSP classification). (a) Native, (b) mutant F1174, and (c) mutant R1275Q.
Calculated mean values for various properties, their standard deviations, and the differences between the mean values of native type and mutated ALK.
| System | Mean | Standard deviation | Difference (Native-Mutant) |
|---|---|---|---|
| RMSD | |||
| Native | 0.244 | 0.01 | |
| F1174L | 0.33 | 0.08 | 0.086 |
| R1275Q | 0.285 | 0.03 | 0.041 |
|
| |||
| RMSF | |||
| Native | 0.14 | 0.04 | |
| F1174L | 0.23 | 0.10 | 0.09 |
| R1275Q | 0.18 | 0.06 | 0.04 |
|
| |||
| RG | |||
| Native | 1.90 | 0.180 | |
| F1174L | 1.96 | 0.193 | 0.06 |
| R1275Q | 1.93 | 0.189 | 0.03 |
|
| |||
| SASA | |||
| Native | 76.2 | 1.42 | |
| F1174L | 82.9 | 1.91 | 6.7 |
| R1275Q | 81.8 | 1.86 | 5.6 |
Figure 6Projection of the motion of the protein in phase space along the first two principal eigenvectors at 300 K. Native type (green colour) versus F1174L (red colour) versus R1275Q (blue colour).
Predication of various phosphorylations and glycosylations sited in ALK.
| Phosphorylation | Glycosylation | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NetPhos 2.0 | GPS 2.0 | Net N Glyc | NetOglyc | ||
| Serine | Threonine | Tyrosine | Tyrosine | Arginine | Threonine |
| 31 | 505 | 240 | 90 | 169 | 1026 |
| 45 | 573 | 276 | 1059 | 244 | 1446 |
| 53 | 674 | 406 | 1278 | 324 | 1447 |
| 76 | 686 | 635 | 1282 | 411 | 1457 |
| 109 | 917 | 705 | 1283 | 445 | |
| 114 | 1151 | 734 | 563 | ||
| 131 | 1307 | 772 | 571 | ||
| 196 | 1363 |
| 709 | ||
| 205 | 1447 |
| 808 | ||
| 211 | 1512 | 1096 | 863 | ||
| 225 | 1547 | 1507 | 864 | ||
| 226 | 1607 |
| 886 | ||
| 986 | |||||
| 1115 | |||||
| 1504 | |||||
Amino acid positions highlighted in bold were found to be experimentally verified.