Prediction of protein-ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: successes and gaps.

Computational methods have become standard in today’s medicinal chemistry tool kit. Like any tool, it is important to periodically evaluate utility and ask how function can be improved. In this section of the Journal, we call attention to the area of calculating molecular interactions, specifically docking, the positioning of a ligand in a protein binding site, and scoring, the quality assessment of docked ligands. As several recent reviews have made clear, 1-3 the technology has been productive for both finding and elaborating bioactive molecules. But has docking and scoring delivered on the promises first made over 20 years ago? To consider that question, we follow up on an extensive symposium held in Philadelphia during the 2004 Fall National Meeting of the American Chemistry Society and on subsequent meetings sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in 2005 and 2006 to address the outcomes of the American Chemical Society symposium. Speakers at the symposium were invited to contribute original manuscripts to be published with this overview to highlight the area of docking and scoring and to identify some of the major gaps yet to be addressed. 4-10

[1]  Thierry Langer,et al.  Recent Advances in Docking and Scoring , 2005 .

[2]  B. Matthews,et al.  A model binding site for testing scoring functions in molecular docking. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  Stephen Hanessian,et al.  A method for induced-fit docking, scoring, and ranking of flexible ligands. Application to peptidic and pseudopeptidic beta-secretase (BACE 1) inhibitors. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  G. V. Paolini,et al.  Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[5]  B. Shoichet,et al.  A common mechanism underlying promiscuous inhibitors from virtual and high-throughput screening. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[6]  Maria Kontoyianni,et al.  Evaluation of docking performance: comparative data on docking algorithms. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[7]  J. Mccammon,et al.  CIRSE: A solvation energy estimator compatible with flexible protein docking and design applications , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[8]  I. Muegge PMF scoring revisited. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  Benoît Roux,et al.  Calculation of Standard Binding Free Energies:  Aromatic Molecules in the T4 Lysozyme L99A Mutant. , 2006, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[10]  David A Pearlman,et al.  Evaluating the molecular mechanics poisson-boltzmann surface area free energy method using a congeneric series of ligands to p38 MAP kinase. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[11]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  M-score: a knowledge-based potential scoring function accounting for protein atom mobility. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[12]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[13]  Renxiao Wang,et al.  The PDBbind database: collection of binding affinities for protein-ligand complexes with known three-dimensional structures. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[14]  Hans-Joachim Böhm,et al.  The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure , 1994, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[15]  Michael G. Lerner,et al.  Binding MOAD (Mother Of All Databases) , 2005, Proteins.

[16]  M. Jacobson,et al.  Virtual screening against highly charged active sites: identifying substrates of alpha-beta barrel enzymes. , 2005, Biochemistry.

[17]  T Lengauer,et al.  The particle concept: placing discrete water molecules during protein‐ligand docking predictions , 1999, Proteins.

[18]  Julian Tirado-Rives,et al.  Contribution of conformer focusing to the uncertainty in predicting free energies for protein-ligand binding. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  Daniel A. Gschwend,et al.  Analysis and optimization of structure-based virtual screening protocols. (3). New methods and old problems in scoring function design. , 2003, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[20]  H. Berendsen,et al.  COMPUTER-SIMULATION OF MOLECULAR-DYNAMICS - METHODOLOGY, APPLICATIONS, AND PERSPECTIVES IN CHEMISTRY , 1990 .

[21]  E. Jaeger,et al.  Comparison of automated docking programs as virtual screening tools. , 2005, Journal of Medicinal Chemistry.

[22]  D. J. Price,et al.  Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[23]  X Chen,et al.  The binding database: overview and user's guide. , 2001, Biopolymers.

[24]  C. E. Peishoff,et al.  A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[25]  J. Irwin,et al.  ZINC ? A Free Database of Commercially Available Compounds for Virtual Screening. , 2005 .

[26]  Richard D. Taylor,et al.  Modeling water molecules in protein-ligand docking using GOLD. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[27]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Parameter estimation for scoring protein-ligand interactions using negative training data. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[28]  M. Gilson,et al.  Free energy, entropy, and induced fit in host-guest recognition: calculations with the second-generation mining minima algorithm. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[29]  A. Johnson,et al.  Molecular complexity analysis of de novo designed ligands. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[30]  H. Berendsen,et al.  Computer Simulation of Molecular Dynamics: Methodology, Applications, and Perspectives in Chemistry , 1990 .

[31]  Robin Taylor,et al.  A new test set for validating predictions of protein–ligand interaction , 2002, Proteins.

[32]  D. Case,et al.  Proton binding to proteins: pK(a) calculations with explicit and implicit solvent models. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[33]  E. Jaeger,et al.  Docking: successes and challenges. , 2005, Current pharmaceutical design.

[34]  B. Shoichet Screening in a spirit haunted world. , 2006, Drug discovery today.