Literature DB >> 26598269

Comparison of the Efficiency of the LIE and MM/GBSA Methods to Calculate Ligand-Binding Energies.

Samuel Genheden1, Ulf Ryde1.   

Abstract

We have evaluated the efficiency of two popular end-point methods to calculate ligand-binding free energies, LIE (linear interaction energy) and MM/GBSA (molecular mechanics with generalized Born surface-area solvation), i.e. the computational effort needed to obtain estimates of a similar precision. As a test case, we use the binding of seven biotin analogues to avidin. The energy terms used by MM/GBSA and LIE exhibit a similar correlation time (∼5 ps), and the equilibration time seems also to be similar, although it varies much between the various ligands. The results show that the LIE method is more effective than MM/GBSA, by a factor of 2-7 for a truncated spherical system with a radius of 26 Å and by a factor of 1.0-2.4 for the full avidin tetramer (radius 47 Å). The reason for this is the cost for the MM/GBSA entropy calculations, which more than compensates for the extra simulation of the free ligand in LIE. On the other hand, LIE requires that the protein is neutralized, whereas MM/GBSA has no such requirements. Our results indicate that both the truncation and neutralization of the proteins may slow the convergence and emphasize small differences in the calculations, e.g., differences between the four subunits in avidin. Moreover, LIE cannot take advantage of the fact that avidin is a tetramer. For this test case, LIE gives poor results with the standard parametrization, but after optimizing the scaling factor of the van der Waals terms, reasonable binding affinities can be obtained, although MM/GBSA still gives a significantly better predictive index and correlation to the experimental affinities.

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 26598269     DOI: 10.1021/ct200163c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput        ISSN: 1549-9618            Impact factor:   6.006


  24 in total

1.  Binding affinities in the SAMPL3 trypsin and host-guest blind tests estimated with the MM/PBSA and LIE methods.

Authors:  Paulius Mikulskis; Samuel Genheden; Patrik Rydberg; Lars Sandberg; Lars Olsen; Ulf Ryde
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2011-12-25       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Molecular simulation methods in drug discovery: a prospective outlook.

Authors:  Xavier Barril; F Javier Luque
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Assessing protein-ligand binding modes with computational tools: the case of PDE4B.

Authors:  Gülşah Çifci; Viktorya Aviyente; E Demet Akten; Gerald Monard
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  Insights from free-energy calculations: protein conformational equilibrium, driving forces, and ligand-binding modes.

Authors:  Yu-Ming M Huang; Wei Chen; Michael J Potter; Chia-En A Chang
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 4.033

5.  A computationally affordable approach for accurate prediction of the binding affinity of JAK2 inhibitors.

Authors:  Nguyen Thi Mai; Ngo Thi Lan; Thien Y Vu; Nguyen Thanh Tung; Huong Thi Thu Phung
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 1.810

6.  In Silico Analysis of Peptide Macrocycle -Protein Interactions.

Authors:  Margaret M Hurley; Meagan C Small
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

7.  Comparison of radii sets, entropy, QM methods, and sampling on MM-PBSA, MM-GBSA, and QM/MM-GBSA ligand binding energies of F. tularensis enoyl-ACP reductase (FabI).

Authors:  Pin-Chih Su; Cheng-Chieh Tsai; Shahila Mehboob; Kirk E Hevener; Michael E Johnson
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2015-07-27       Impact factor: 3.376

8.  Evaluating thermodynamic integration performance of the new amber molecular dynamics package and assess potential halogen bonds of enoyl-ACP reductase (FabI) benzimidazole inhibitors.

Authors:  Pin-Chih Su; Michael E Johnson
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 3.376

9.  SAMPL6 host-guest challenge: binding free energies via a multistep approach.

Authors:  Yiğitcan Eken; Prajay Patel; Thomas Díaz; Michael R Jones; Angela K Wilson
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 3.686

10.  Polar Desolvation and Position 226 of Pancreatic and Neutrophil Elastases Are Crucial to their Affinity for the Kunitz-Type Inhibitors ShPI-1 and ShPI-1/K13L.

Authors:  Jorge Enrique Hernández González; Rossana García-Fernández; Pedro Alberto Valiente
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.