Trevor S Frisby1, Christopher James Langmead2. 1. Computational Biology Department, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA. 2. Computational Biology Department, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA. cjl@cs.cmu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Directed evolution (DE) is a technique for protein engineering that involves iterative rounds of mutagenesis and screening to search for sequences that optimize a given property, such as binding affinity to a specified target. Unfortunately, the underlying optimization problem is under-determined, and so mutations introduced to improve the specified property may come at the expense of unmeasured, but nevertheless important properties (ex. solubility, thermostability, etc). We address this issue by formulating DE as a regularized Bayesian optimization problem where the regularization term reflects evolutionary or structure-based constraints. RESULTS: We applied our approach to DE to three representative proteins, GB1, BRCA1, and SARS-CoV-2 Spike, and evaluated both evolutionary and structure-based regularization terms. The results of these experiments demonstrate that: (i) structure-based regularization usually leads to better designs (and never hurts), compared to the unregularized setting; (ii) evolutionary-based regularization tends to be least effective; and (iii) regularization leads to better designs because it effectively focuses the search in certain areas of sequence space, making better use of the experimental budget. Additionally, like previous work in Machine learning assisted DE, we find that our approach significantly reduces the experimental burden of DE, relative to model-free methods. CONCLUSION: Introducing regularization into a Bayesian ML-assisted DE framework alters the exploratory patterns of the underlying optimization routine, and can shift variant selections towards those with a range of targeted and desirable properties. In particular, we find that structure-based regularization often improves variant selection compared to unregularized approaches, and never hurts.
BACKGROUND: Directed evolution (DE) is a technique for protein engineering that involves iterative rounds of mutagenesis and screening to search for sequences that optimize a given property, such as binding affinity to a specified target. Unfortunately, the underlying optimization problem is under-determined, and so mutations introduced to improve the specified property may come at the expense of unmeasured, but nevertheless important properties (ex. solubility, thermostability, etc). We address this issue by formulating DE as a regularized Bayesian optimization problem where the regularization term reflects evolutionary or structure-based constraints. RESULTS: We applied our approach to DE to three representative proteins, GB1, BRCA1, and SARS-CoV-2Spike, and evaluated both evolutionary and structure-based regularization terms. The results of these experiments demonstrate that: (i) structure-based regularization usually leads to better designs (and never hurts), compared to the unregularized setting; (ii) evolutionary-based regularization tends to be least effective; and (iii) regularization leads to better designs because it effectively focuses the search in certain areas of sequence space, making better use of the experimental budget. Additionally, like previous work in Machine learning assisted DE, we find that our approach significantly reduces the experimental burden of DE, relative to model-free methods. CONCLUSION: Introducing regularization into a Bayesian ML-assisted DE framework alters the exploratory patterns of the underlying optimization routine, and can shift variant selections towards those with a range of targeted and desirable properties. In particular, we find that structure-based regularization often improves variant selection compared to unregularized approaches, and never hurts.
Entities:
Keywords:
Active learning; Bayesian optimization; Directed evolution; Gaussian process regression; Protein design; Protein language model; Rational design; Regularization
Authors: Lars Giger; Sami Caner; Richard Obexer; Peter Kast; David Baker; Nenad Ban; Donald Hilvert Journal: Nat Chem Biol Date: 2013-06-09 Impact factor: 15.040
Authors: Alexander Rives; Joshua Meier; Tom Sercu; Siddharth Goyal; Zeming Lin; Jason Liu; Demi Guo; Myle Ott; C Lawrence Zitnick; Jerry Ma; Rob Fergus Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-04-13 Impact factor: 11.205