Significant Enhancement of Docking Sensitivity Using Implicit Ligand Sampling

The efficient and accurate quantification of protein-ligand interactions using computational methods is still a challenging task. Two factors strongly contribute to the failure of docking methods to predict free energies of binding accurately: the insufficient incorporation of protein flexibility coupled to ligand binding and the neglected dynamics of the protein-ligand complex in current scoring schemes. We have developed a new methodology, named the 'ligand-model' concept, to sample protein conformations that are relevant for binding structurally diverse sets of ligands. In the ligand-model concept, molecular-dynamics (MD) simulations are performed with a virtual ligand, represented by a collection of functional groups that binds to the protein and dynamically changes its shape and properties during the simulation. The ligand model essentially represents a large ensemble of different chemical species binding to the same target protein. Representative protein structures were obtained from the MD simulation, and docking was performed into this ensemble of protein conformation. Similar binding poses were clustered, and the averaged score was utilized to rerank the poses. We demonstrate that the ligand-model approach yields significant improvements in predicting native-like binding poses and quantifying binding affinities compared to static docking and ensemble docking simulations into protein structures generated from an apo MD simulation.

[1]  Nicolas Moitessier,et al.  Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules. 4. Are Popular Scoring Functions Accurate for this Class of Proteins? , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[2]  Christopher R. Corbeil,et al.  Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules. 3. Impact of Input Ligand Conformation, Protein Flexibility, and Water Molecules on the Accuracy of Docking Programs , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[3]  Zhihai Liu,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions on a Diverse Test Set , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  Cinque S. Soto,et al.  Evaluating conformational free energies: The colony energy and its application to the problem of loop prediction , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  J. Aqvist,et al.  A new method for predicting binding affinity in computer-aided drug design. , 1994, Protein engineering.

[6]  D. Jacobs,et al.  Protein flexibility and dynamics using constraint theory. , 2001, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[7]  Manfred Kansy,et al.  A Fluorine Scan at the Catalytic Center of Thrombin: CF, COH, and COMe Bioisosterism and Fluorine Effects on pKa and log D Values , 2006, ChemMedChem.

[8]  Gerrit Groenhof,et al.  GROMACS: Fast, flexible, and free , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[9]  Leslie A Kuhn,et al.  StoneHinge: Hinge prediction by network analysis of individual protein structures , 2009, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[10]  I. Bahar,et al.  Coarse-grained normal mode analysis in structural biology. , 2005, Current opinion in structural biology.

[11]  J. Mccammon,et al.  Computational drug design accommodating receptor flexibility: the relaxed complex scheme. , 2002, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[12]  P. Cozzini Target Flexibility: An Emerging Consideration in Drug Discovery and Design , 2009 .

[13]  S. Teague Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery , 2003, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[14]  Leslie A Kuhn,et al.  Protein unfolding: Rigidity lost , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Matthew L. Danielson,et al.  Computer-aided drug design platform using PyMOL , 2011, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[16]  Kai Zhu,et al.  Improved Methods for Side Chain and Loop Predictions via the Protein Local Optimization Program:  Variable Dielectric Model for Implicitly Improving the Treatment of Polarization Effects. , 2007, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[17]  Ian W. Davis,et al.  RosettaLigand docking with full ligand and receptor flexibility. , 2009, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  Christoph A Sotriffer,et al.  Accounting for induced-fit effects in docking: what is possible and what is not? , 2011, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[19]  Akiko Itai,et al.  Effective handling of induced‐fit motion in flexible docking , 2006, Proteins.

[20]  Somesh D. Sharma,et al.  Managing protein flexibility in docking and its applications. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[21]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Allostery and population shift in drug discovery. , 2010, Current opinion in pharmacology.

[22]  Randy J. Read,et al.  A multiple‐start Monte Carlo docking method , 1992 .

[23]  Jung-Hsin Lin,et al.  The relaxed complex method: Accommodating receptor flexibility for drug design with an improved scoring scheme. , 2003, Biopolymers.

[24]  Pedro Alexandrino Fernandes,et al.  Protein–ligand docking: Current status and future challenges , 2006, Proteins.

[25]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  AutoDock4 and AutoDockTools4: Automated docking with selective receptor flexibility , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[26]  Christopher W. Murray,et al.  The sensitivity of the results of molecular docking to induced fit effects: Application to thrombin, thermolysin and neuraminidase , 1999, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[27]  Markus A Lill,et al.  New computational method for prediction of interacting protein loop regions , 2010, Proteins.

[28]  D W Banner,et al.  Molecular recognition at the thrombin active site: structure-based design and synthesis of potent and selective thrombin inhibitors and the X-ray crystal structures of two thrombin-inhibitor complexes. , 1997, Chemistry & biology.

[29]  R. Friesner,et al.  Long loop prediction using the protein local optimization program , 2006, Proteins.

[30]  R. Read,et al.  A multiple-start Monte Carlo docking method. , 1992, Proteins.

[31]  I. Kuntz,et al.  The maximal affinity of ligands. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  R. Friesner,et al.  Novel procedure for modeling ligand/receptor induced fit effects. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  Heather A Carlson,et al.  Protein flexibility and species specificity in structure-based drug discovery: dihydrofolate reductase as a test system. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[34]  J Andrew McCammon,et al.  Studying enzyme binding specificity in acetylcholinesterase using a combined molecular dynamics and multiple docking approach. , 2002, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[35]  Manfred Kansy,et al.  Multipolar interactions in the D pocket of thrombin: large differences between tricyclic imide and lactam inhibitors. , 2006, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

[36]  Jung-Hsin Lin Accommodating protein flexibility for structure-based drug design. , 2011, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[37]  B. Honig,et al.  A hierarchical approach to all‐atom protein loop prediction , 2004, Proteins.

[38]  Martin Fechner,et al.  Speeding up parallel GROMACS on high‐latency networks , 2007, J. Comput. Chem..

[39]  Markus A Lill,et al.  Prediction of Small‐Molecule Binding to Cytochrome P450 3A4: Flexible Docking Combined with Multidimensional QSAR , 2006, ChemMedChem.

[40]  J. Kirkwood Statistical Mechanics of Fluid Mixtures , 1935 .

[41]  Arthur J. Olson,et al.  AutoDock Vina: Improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[42]  R. Zwanzig High‐Temperature Equation of State by a Perturbation Method. I. Nonpolar Gases , 1954 .

[43]  Leslie A Kuhn,et al.  Modeling correlated main‐chain motions in proteins for flexible molecular recognition , 2004, Proteins.

[44]  Ivet Bahar,et al.  Elastic network models for understanding biomolecular machinery: from enzymes to supramolecular assemblies , 2005, Physical biology.

[45]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Conformational ensembles, signal transduction and residue hot spots: application to drug discovery. , 2010, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[46]  Sandor Vajda,et al.  Algorithms for computational solvent mapping of proteins , 2003, Proteins.

[47]  M. Elbaum,et al.  Direct discrimination between models of protein activation by single-molecule force measurements. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[48]  F. Bushman,et al.  Developing a dynamic pharmacophore model for HIV-1 integrase. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[49]  I. Bahar,et al.  Global dynamics of proteins: bridging between structure and function. , 2010, Annual review of biophysics.

[50]  P A Kollman,et al.  Continuum solvent studies of the stability of RNA hairpin loops and helices. , 1998, Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics.

[51]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Soft docking and multiple receptor conformations in virtual screening. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[52]  A. Leach,et al.  Ligand docking to proteins with discrete side-chain flexibility. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[53]  R. Elber,et al.  Modeling side chains in peptides and proteins: Application of the locally enhanced sampling and the simulated annealing methods to find minimum energy conformations , 1991 .

[54]  Frank Eisenhaber,et al.  Improved strategy in analytic surface calculation for molecular systems: Handling of singularities and computational efficiency , 1993, J. Comput. Chem..

[55]  Chris Sander,et al.  The double cubic lattice method: Efficient approaches to numerical integration of surface area and volume and to dot surface contouring of molecular assemblies , 1995, J. Comput. Chem..

[56]  H. Carlson Protein flexibility and drug design: how to hit a moving target. , 2002, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[57]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Information decay in molecular docking screens against holo, apo, and modeled conformations of enzymes. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[58]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Molecular docking to ensembles of protein structures. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[59]  T Lengauer,et al.  Two-stage method for protein-ligand docking. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[60]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  The Amber biomolecular simulation programs , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[61]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Induced Fit, Conformational Selection and Independent Dynamic Segments: an Extended View of Binding Events Opinion , 2022 .

[62]  Song Liu,et al.  Accurate and efficient loop selections by the DFIRE‐based all‐atom statistical potential , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.