“Quasi flexible” automatic docking processing for studying stereoselective recognition mechanisms, part 2: Prediction of ΔΔG of complexation and 1H‐NMR NOE correlation

The purpose of this work is to apply the global molecular interaction evaluation (“Glob‐MolInE”) computational protocol to the study of two molecular complexes characterized by a chiral selector and a couple of enantiomeric selectands experimentally known to give large difference in the free energy of complexation much higher than the experimental error normally associated to the molecular mechanic calculations. We have considered the well known diastereomeric complexes between the selector (S)‐N‐(3,5‐dinitrobenzoyl)‐leucine‐n‐propylamide (S)‐1 and the selectands (R) or (S)‐N‐(2‐naphthyl)‐alanine methyl ester 2, widely studied by enantioselective HPLC, NMR and X‐ray. The experimental difference of free energy of complexation between [(S)‐1•(R)‐2] and [(S)‐1•(S)‐2] (−1.34 kcal/mol) was reproduced by the new computational protocol with an excellent confidence error. Detailed results about the conformational search, the “quasi‐flexible” docking and the thermodynamic estimation are presented in this work. A remarkable correlation between the theoretical results and experimental data (NOE measurements, X‐ray crystallographic structure of the [(S)‐1•(S)‐2] complex and the free energy of complexation) supports the validity of the computational approach and underline the importance of the conformational multiplicity in the definition of the macroscopic properties of the complex in solution. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem 2007

[1]  Kari Rissanen,et al.  Elucidation of the chiral recognition mechanism of cinchona alkaloid carbamate-type receptors for 3,5-dinitrobenzoyl amino acids. , 2002, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[2]  Paul Watson,et al.  A web-based platform for virtual screening. , 2003, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[3]  F. Gasparrini,et al.  Conformational studies by dynamic NMR. 47. Conformation, stereodynamics, and chiral separation of the rotational enantiomers of hindered naphthyl ketones , 1992 .

[4]  Jeremy R. H. Tame,et al.  Scoring functions: A view from the bench , 1999, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[5]  Michael P. Williamson,et al.  The Nuclear Overhauser Effect , 2008 .

[6]  Stefano Alcaro,et al.  A “quasi‐flexible” automatic docking processing for studying stereoselective recognition mechanisms. Part I. Protocol validation , 2000, J. Comput. Chem..

[7]  M Rarey,et al.  Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[8]  Ajay,et al.  Computational methods to predict binding free energy in ligand-receptor complexes. , 1995, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  G. Chang,et al.  An internal-coordinate Monte Carlo method for searching conformational space , 1989 .

[10]  Stefano Alcaro,et al.  Molecular Modeling of the Antitumor Agents Azinomycins A and B: Force-Field Parametrization and DNA Cross-Linking-Based Filtering , 1998 .

[11]  Kenny B. Lipkowitz,et al.  Protocol for determining enantioselective binding of chiral analytes on chiral chromatographic surfaces , 1988 .

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

[13]  G. Chang,et al.  Macromodel—an integrated software system for modeling organic and bioorganic molecules using molecular mechanics , 1990 .

[14]  William H. Pirkle,et al.  Chiral molecular recognition in small bimolecular systems: a spectroscopic investigation into the nature of diastereomeric complexes , 1987 .

[15]  J. Irwin,et al.  Lead discovery using molecular docking. , 2002, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[16]  Kenny B. Lipkowitz,et al.  Dynamic molecular surface areas , 1989 .

[17]  K B Lipkowitz,et al.  Atomistic modeling of enantioselective binding. , 2000, Accounts of chemical research.