Literature DB >> 27510546

Calculating protein-ligand binding affinities with MMPBSA: Method and error analysis.

Changhao Wang1,2,3, Peter H Nguyen2, Kevin Pham2, Danielle Huynh2, Thanh-Binh Nancy Le2, Hongli Wang2, Pengyu Ren4, Ray Luo5,6,7,8.   

Abstract

Molecular Mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann Surface Area (MMPBSA) methods have become widely adopted in estimating protein-ligand binding affinities due to their efficiency and high correlation with experiment. Here different computational alternatives were investigated to assess their impact to the agreement of MMPBSA calculations with experiment. Seven receptor families with both high-quality crystal structures and binding affinities were selected. First the performance of nonpolar solvation models was studied and it was found that the modern approach that separately models hydrophobic and dispersion interactions dramatically reduces RMSD's of computed relative binding affinities. The numerical setup of the Poisson-Boltzmann methods was analyzed next. The data shows that the impact of grid spacing to the quality of MMPBSA calculations is small: the numerical error at the grid spacing of 0.5 Å is already small enough to be negligible. The impact of different atomic radius sets and different molecular surface definitions was further analyzed and weak influences were found on the agreement with experiment. The influence of solute dielectric constant was also analyzed: a higher dielectric constant generally improves the overall agreement with experiment, especially for highly charged binding pockets. The data also showed that the converged simulations caused slight reduction in the agreement with experiment. Finally the direction of estimating absolute binding free energies was briefly explored. Upon correction of the binding-induced rearrangement free energy and the binding entropy lost, the errors in absolute binding affinities were also reduced dramatically when the modern nonpolar solvent model was used, although further developments were apparently necessary to further improve the MMPBSA methods.
© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvent models; molecular dynamics; nonpolar solvent models

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27510546      PMCID: PMC5018451          DOI: 10.1002/jcc.24467

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Chem        ISSN: 0192-8651            Impact factor:   3.376


  82 in total

1.  Fast, efficient generation of high-quality atomic charges. AM1-BCC model: II. Parameterization and validation.

Authors:  Araz Jakalian; David B Jack; Christopher I Bayly
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.376

2.  Physical scoring function based on AMBER force field and Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvent for protein structure prediction.

Authors:  Meng-Juei Hsieh; Ray Luo
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2004-08-15

3.  pKa's of ionizable groups in proteins: atomic detail from a continuum electrostatic model.

Authors:  D Bashford; M Karplus
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  1990-11-06       Impact factor: 3.162

4.  Computations of Absolute Solvation Free Energies of Small Molecules Using Explicit and Implicit Solvent Model.

Authors:  Devleena Shivakumar; Yuqing Deng; Benoît Roux
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2009-03-24       Impact factor: 6.006

5.  Overcoming entropic barrier with coupled sampling at dual resolutions.

Authors:  Thur Zar Lwin; Ray Luo
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2005-11-15       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  Automatic atom type and bond type perception in molecular mechanical calculations.

Authors:  Junmei Wang; Wei Wang; Peter A Kollman; David A Case
Journal:  J Mol Graph Model       Date:  2006-02-03       Impact factor: 2.518

7.  Assessing implicit models for nonpolar mean solvation forces: the importance of dispersion and volume terms.

Authors:  Jason A Wagoner; Nathan A Baker
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-05-18       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Quantitative analysis of Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvent in molecular dynamics.

Authors:  Jun Wang; Chunhu Tan; Emmanuel Chanco; Ray Luo
Journal:  Phys Chem Chem Phys       Date:  2009-12-23       Impact factor: 3.676

9.  Accounting for ligand conformational restriction in calculations of protein-ligand binding affinities.

Authors:  Cen Gao; Min-Sun Park; Harry A Stern
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2010-03-03       Impact factor: 4.033

10.  Computation of molecular electrostatics with boundary element methods.

Authors:  J Liang; S Subramaniam
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 4.033

View more
  42 in total

1.  Evaluating the performance of MM/PBSA for binding affinity prediction using class A GPCR crystal structures.

Authors:  Mei Qian Yau; Abigail L Emtage; Nathaniel J Y Chan; Stephen W Doughty; Jason S E Loo
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2019-04-15       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Computational Design of PDZ-Peptide Binding.

Authors:  Nicolas Panel; Francesco Villa; Vaitea Opuu; David Mignon; Thomas Simonson
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2021

3.  Robustness and Efficiency of Poisson-Boltzmann Modeling on Graphics Processing Units.

Authors:  Ruxi Qi; Ray Luo
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2018-12-31       Impact factor: 4.956

4.  An efficient second-order poisson-boltzmann method.

Authors:  Haixin Wei; Ray Luo; Ruxi Qi
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 3.376

5.  Modeling Membrane Protein-Ligand Binding Interactions: The Human Purinergic Platelet Receptor.

Authors:  D'Artagnan Greene; Wesley M Botello-Smith; Alec Follmer; Li Xiao; Eleftherios Lambros; Ray Luo
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 2.991

6.  A Continuum Poisson-Boltzmann Model for Membrane Channel Proteins.

Authors:  Li Xiao; Jianxiong Diao; D'Artagnan Greene; Junmei Wang; Ray Luo
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 6.006

7.  Ionic Solution: What Goes Right and Wrong with Continuum Solvation Modeling.

Authors:  Changhao Wang; Pengyu Ren; Ray Luo
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 2.991

Review 8.  Thermodynamics and Kinetics of Drug-Target Binding by Molecular Simulation.

Authors:  Sergio Decherchi; Andrea Cavalli
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 60.622

9.  Elucidation of WW domain ligand binding specificities in the Hippo pathway reveals STXBP4 as YAP inhibitor.

Authors:  Rebecca E Vargas; Vy Thuy Duong; Han Han; Albert Paul Ta; Yuxuan Chen; Shiji Zhao; Bing Yang; Gayoung Seo; Kimberly Chuc; Sunwoo Oh; Amal El Ali; Olga V Razorenova; Junjie Chen; Ray Luo; Xu Li; Wenqi Wang
Journal:  EMBO J       Date:  2019-11-29       Impact factor: 11.598

10.  Computational Analysis for the Rational Design of Anti-Amyloid Beta (Aβ) Antibodies.

Authors:  D'Artagnan Greene; Theodora Po; Jennifer Pan; Tanya Tabibian; Ray Luo
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 2.991

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.