Literature DB >> 28034750

Computing the binding affinity of a ligand buried deep inside a protein with the hybrid steered molecular dynamics.

Oscar D Villarreal1, Lili Yu2, Roberto A Rodriguez1, Liao Y Chen3.   

Abstract

Computing the ligand-protein binding affinity (or the Gibbs free energy) with chemical accuracy has long been a challenge for which many methods/approaches have been developed and refined with various successful applications. False positives and, even more harmful, false negatives have been and still are a common occurrence in practical applications. Inevitable in all approaches are the errors in the force field parameters we obtain from quantum mechanical computation and/or empirical fittings for the intra- and inter-molecular interactions. These errors propagate to the final results of the computed binding affinities even if we were able to perfectly implement the statistical mechanics of all the processes relevant to a given problem. And they are actually amplified to various degrees even in the mature, sophisticated computational approaches. In particular, the free energy perturbation (alchemical) approaches amplify the errors in the force field parameters because they rely on extracting the small differences between similarly large numbers. In this paper, we develop a hybrid steered molecular dynamics (hSMD) approach to the difficult binding problems of a ligand buried deep inside a protein. Sampling the transition along a physical (not alchemical) dissociation path of opening up the binding cavity---pulling out the ligand---closing back the cavity, we can avoid the problem of error amplifications by not relying on small differences between similar numbers. We tested this new form of hSMD on retinol inside cellular retinol-binding protein 1 and three cases of a ligand (a benzylacetate, a 2-nitrothiophene, and a benzene) inside a T4 lysozyme L99A/M102Q(H) double mutant. In all cases, we obtained binding free energies in close agreement with the experimentally measured values. This indicates that the force field parameters we employed are accurate and that hSMD (a brute force, unsophisticated approach) is free from the problem of error amplification suffered by many sophisticated approaches in the literature.
Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Binding affinity; Ligand-protein interaction; Molecular dynamics; Retinol-binding protein; T4-lysozyme mutants

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28034750      PMCID: PMC5253313          DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2016.12.165

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun        ISSN: 0006-291X            Impact factor:   3.575


  36 in total

1.  Absolute free energy of binding of avidin/biotin, revisited.

Authors:  Ignacio J General; Ralitsa Dragomirova; Hagai Meirovitch
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2012-02-27       Impact factor: 2.991

2.  Evaluation of Generalized Born Model Accuracy for Absolute Binding Free Energy Calculations.

Authors:  Fabian Zeller; Martin Zacharias
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2014-06-27       Impact factor: 2.991

3.  Ranking protein-protein docking results using steered molecular dynamics and potential of mean force calculations.

Authors:  Laura J Kingsley; Juan Esquivel-Rodríguez; Ying Yang; Daisuke Kihara; Markus A Lill
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2016-05-27       Impact factor: 3.376

Review 4.  Computations of standard binding free energies with molecular dynamics simulations.

Authors:  Yuqing Deng; Benoît Roux
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 2.991

5.  CHARMM general force field: A force field for drug-like molecules compatible with the CHARMM all-atom additive biological force fields.

Authors:  K Vanommeslaeghe; E Hatcher; C Acharya; S Kundu; S Zhong; J Shim; E Darian; O Guvench; P Lopes; I Vorobyov; A D Mackerell
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.376

6.  Optimization of the additive CHARMM all-atom protein force field targeting improved sampling of the backbone φ, ψ and side-chain χ(1) and χ(2) dihedral angles.

Authors:  Robert B Best; Xiao Zhu; Jihyun Shim; Pedro E M Lopes; Jeetain Mittal; Michael Feig; Alexander D Mackerell
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 6.006

7.  Molecular dynamics simulations on the effect of size and shape on the interactions between negative Au18(SR)14, Au102(SR)44 and Au144(SR)60 nanoparticles in physiological saline.

Authors:  Oscar D Villareal; Roberto A Rodriguez; Lili Yu; Thierry O Wambo
Journal:  Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp       Date:  2016-08-20       Impact factor: 4.539

Review 8.  Theory of free energy and entropy in noncovalent binding.

Authors:  Huan-Xiang Zhou; Michael K Gilson
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 60.622

9.  Steered molecular dynamics study of inhibitor binding in the internal binding site in dehaloperoxidase-hemoglobin.

Authors:  Zhisen Zhang; Andrew P Santos; Qing Zhou; Lijun Liang; Qi Wang; Tao Wu; Stefan Franzen
Journal:  Biophys Chem       Date:  2016-01-16       Impact factor: 2.352

10.  The impact of introducing a histidine into an apolar cavity site on docking and ligand recognition.

Authors:  Matthew Merski; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 7.446

View more
  6 in total

1.  Free-energy landscape of molecular interactions between endothelin 1 and human endothelin type B receptor: fly-casting mechanism.

Authors:  Junichi Higo; Kota Kasahara; Mitsuhito Wada; Bhaskar Dasgupta; Narutoshi Kamiya; Tomonori Hayami; Ikuo Fukuda; Yoshifumi Fukunishi; Haruki Nakamura
Journal:  Protein Eng Des Sel       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 1.650

2.  Computational Tools for Accurate Binding Free-Energy Prediction.

Authors:  Maria M Reif; Martin Zacharias
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

3.  Charge-Changing Perturbations and Path Sampling via Classical Molecular Dynamic Simulations of Simple Guest-Host Systems.

Authors:  Christoph Öhlknecht; Jan Walther Perthold; Bettina Lier; Chris Oostenbrink
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 6.006

4.  Determination of Multidirectional Pathways for Ligand Release from the Receptor: A New Approach Based on Differential Evolution.

Authors:  Hoang Linh Nguyen; Nguyen Quoc Thai; Mai Suan Li
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 6.578

5.  Ligand Gaussian Accelerated Molecular Dynamics (LiGaMD): Characterization of Ligand Binding Thermodynamics and Kinetics.

Authors:  Yinglong Miao; Apurba Bhattarai; Jinan Wang
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2020-08-07       Impact factor: 6.006

6.  How Good is Jarzynski's Equality for Computer-Aided Drug Design?

Authors:  Kiet Ho; Duc Toan Truong; Mai Suan Li
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 2.991

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.