Literature DB >> 34029468

Scaffold Hopping Transformations Using Auxiliary Restraints for Calculating Accurate Relative Binding Free Energies.

Junjie Zou1,2,3, Zhipeng Li1, Shuai Liu4, Chunwang Peng1, Dong Fang1, Xiao Wan1, Zhixiong Lin1, Tai-Sung Lee5, Daniel P Raleigh2,3, Mingjun Yang1, Carlos Simmerling2,3.   

Abstract

In silico screening of drug-target interactions is a key part of the drug discovery process. Changes in the drug scaffold via contraction or expansion of rings, the breaking of rings, and the introduction of cyclic structures from acyclic structures are commonly applied by medicinal chemists to improve binding affinity and enhance favorable properties of candidate compounds. These processes, commonly referred to as scaffold hopping, are challenging to model computationally. Although relative binding free energy (RBFE) calculations have shown success in predicting binding affinity changes caused by perturbing R-groups attached to a common scaffold, applications of RBFE calculations to modeling scaffold hopping are relatively limited. Scaffold hopping inevitably involves breaking and forming bond interactions of quadratic functional forms, which is highly challenging. A novel method for handling ring opening/closure/contraction/expansion and linker contraction/expansion is presented here. To the best of our knowledge, RBFE calculations on linker contraction/expansion have not been previously reported. The method uses auxiliary restraints to hold the atoms at the ends of a bond in place during the breaking and forming of the bonds. The broad applicability of the method was demonstrated by examining perturbations involving small-molecule macrocycles and mutations of proline in proteins. High accuracy was obtained using the method for most of the perturbations studied. The rigor of the method was isolated from the force field by validating the method using relative and absolute hydration free energy calculations compared to standard simulation results. Unlike other methods that rely on λ-dependent functional forms for bond interactions, the method presented here can be employed using modern molecular dynamics software without modification of codes or force field functions.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 34029468      PMCID: PMC8215533          DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00214

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput        ISSN: 1549-9618            Impact factor:   6.578


  84 in total

1.  Structure and energetics of protein-protein interactions: the role of conformational heterogeneity in OMTKY3 binding to serine proteases.

Authors:  James R Horn; S Ramaswamy; Kenneth P Murphy
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2003-08-08       Impact factor: 5.469

2.  Native like structure in the unfolded state of the villin headpiece helical subdomain, an ultrafast folding protein.

Authors:  Wenli Meng; Bing Shan; Yuefeng Tang; Daniel P Raleigh
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 6.725

3.  MolProbity: More and better reference data for improved all-atom structure validation.

Authors:  Christopher J Williams; Jeffrey J Headd; Nigel W Moriarty; Michael G Prisant; Lizbeth L Videau; Lindsay N Deis; Vishal Verma; Daniel A Keedy; Bradley J Hintze; Vincent B Chen; Swati Jain; Steven M Lewis; W Bryan Arendall; Jack Snoeyink; Paul D Adams; Simon C Lovell; Jane S Richardson; David C Richardson
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 6.725

4.  Automation of AMOEBA polarizable force field parameterization for small molecules.

Authors:  Johnny C Wu; Gaurav Chattree; Pengyu Ren
Journal:  Theor Chem Acc       Date:  2012-02-26       Impact factor: 1.702

5.  Structure-based design, synthesis, and biological evaluation of potent and selective macrocyclic checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitors.

Authors:  Zhi-Fu Tao; Le Wang; Kent D Stewart; Zehan Chen; Wendy Gu; Mai-Ha Bui; Philip Merta; Haiying Zhang; Peter Kovar; Eric Johnson; Chang Park; Russell Judge; Saul Rosenberg; Thomas Sowin; Nan-Horng Lin
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 7.446

6.  DU-176b, a potent and orally active factor Xa inhibitor: in vitro and in vivo pharmacological profiles.

Authors:  T Furugohri; K Isobe; Y Honda; C Kamisato-Matsumoto; N Sugiyama; T Nagahara; Y Morishima; T Shibano
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2008-07-04       Impact factor: 5.824

7.  Benzopyrans as selective estrogen receptor beta agonists (SERBAs). Part 3: synthesis of cyclopentanone and cyclohexanone intermediates for C-ring modification.

Authors:  Timothy I Richardson; Jeffrey A Dodge; Gregory L Durst; Lance A Pfeifer; Jikesh Shah; Yong Wang; Jim D Durbin; Venkatesh Krishnan; Bryan H Norman
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem Lett       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 2.823

Review 8.  Cysteine cathepsin S as an immunomodulatory target: present and future trends.

Authors:  Suman Gupta; Rakesh Kumar Singh; Sunanda Dastidar; Abhijit Ray
Journal:  Expert Opin Ther Targets       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 6.902

9.  Molecular insights into protein synthesis with proline residues.

Authors:  Sergey Melnikov; Justine Mailliot; Lukas Rigger; Sandro Neuner; Byung-Sik Shin; Gulnara Yusupova; Thomas E Dever; Ronald Micura; Marat Yusupov
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 8.807

10.  BACE1 deletion in the adult mouse reverses preformed amyloid deposition and improves cognitive functions.

Authors:  Xiangyou Hu; Brati Das; Hailong Hou; Wanxia He; Riqiang Yan
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 14.307

View more
  1 in total

1.  Relative Binding Free Energy between Chemically Distant Compounds Using a Bidirectional Nonequilibrium Approach.

Authors:  Piero Procacci
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 6.578

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.