Consistent Improvement of Cross-Docking Results Using Binding Site Ensembles Generated with Elastic Network Normal Modes

The representation of protein flexibility is still a challenge for the state-of-the-art flexible ligand docking protocols. In this article, we use a large and diverse benchmark to prove that is possible to improve consistently the cross-docking performance against a single receptor conformation, using an equilibrium ensemble of binding site conformers. The benchmark contained 28 proteins, and our method predicted the top-ranked near native ligand poses 20% more efficiently than using a single receptor. The multiple conformations were derived from the collective variable space defined by all heavy-atom elastic network normal modes, including backbone and side chains. We have found that the binding site displacements for best positioning of the ligand seem rather independent from the global collective motions of the protein. We also found that the number of binding site conformations needed to represent nonredundant flexibility was < 100. The ensemble of receptor conformations can be generated at our Web site at http://abagyan.scripps.edu/MRC.

[1]  Harold A. Scheraga,et al.  On the Use of Classical Statistical Mechanics in the Treatment of Polymer Chain Conformation , 1976 .

[2]  Jeremy C. Smith,et al.  The role of dynamics in enzyme activity. , 2003, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[3]  N. Go,et al.  Harmonicity and anharmonicity in protein dynamics: A normal mode analysis and principal component analysis , 1995, Proteins.

[4]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Predictions of protein flexibility: First‐order measures , 2004, Proteins.

[5]  Zheng Yuan,et al.  Flexibility analysis of enzyme active sites by crystallographic temperature factors. , 2003, Protein engineering.

[6]  Modesto Orozco,et al.  Exploring the Essential Dynamics of B-DNA. , 2005, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[7]  Gail J. Bartlett,et al.  Analysis of catalytic residues in enzyme active sites. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[8]  X. Barril,et al.  Unveiling the full potential of flexible receptor docking using multiple crystallographic structures. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  H. Scheraga,et al.  Energy parameters in polypeptides. 10. Improved geometrical parameters and nonbonded interactions for use in the ECEPP/3 algorithm, with application to proline-containing peptides , 1994 .

[10]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Derivation of sensitive discrimination potential for virtual ligand screening , 1999, RECOMB.

[11]  J. Thornton,et al.  Conformational changes observed in enzyme crystal structures upon substrate binding. , 2005, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Representing receptor flexibility in ligand docking through relevant normal modes. , 2005, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[13]  M. Karplus,et al.  Molecular dynamics and protein function. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  Lisa Yan,et al.  Fully Automated Molecular Mechanics Based Induced Fit Protein—Ligand Docking Method. , 2009 .

[15]  Ronald M. Levy,et al.  Vibrational approach to the dynamics of an α‐helix , 1979 .

[16]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  Probing flexibility and “induced‐fit” phenomena in aldose reductase by comparative crystal structure analysis and molecular dynamics simulations , 2004, Proteins.

[17]  G. Keserű,et al.  Comparative virtual and experimental high-throughput screening for glycogen synthase kinase-3beta inhibitors. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[18]  P. Fischer,et al.  Protein structures in virtual screening: a case study with CDK2. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  Carmen Almansa,et al.  Dissection of the recognition properties of p38 MAP kinase. Determination of the binding mode of a new pyridinyl-heterocycle inhibitor family. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[20]  Robert P. Sheridan,et al.  Multiple protein structures and multiple ligands: effects on the apparent goodness of virtual screening results , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[21]  Adrian H Elcock,et al.  Structure selection for protein kinase docking and virtual screening: homology models or crystal structures? , 2006, Current protein & peptide science.

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

[23]  Federico Gago,et al.  Overcoming the Inadequacies or Limitations of Experimental Structures as Drug Targets by Using Computational Modeling Tools and Molecular Dynamics Simulations , 2007, ChemMedChem.

[24]  X. Zou,et al.  Ensemble docking of multiple protein structures: Considering protein structural variations in molecular docking , 2006, Proteins.

[25]  Rieko Ishima,et al.  Protein dynamics from NMR , 2000, Nature Structural Biology.

[26]  Heather A Carlson,et al.  Gaussian-weighted RMSD superposition of proteins: a structural comparison for flexible proteins and predicted protein structures. , 2006, Biophysical journal.

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

[28]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  A new method for ligand docking to flexible receptors by dual alanine scanning and refinement (SCARE) , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[29]  Robert L. Jernigan,et al.  Collective Dynamics of Large Proteins from Mixed Coarse‐Grained Elastic Network Model , 2005 .

[30]  David W Ritchie,et al.  Docking essential dynamics eigenstructures , 2005, Proteins.

[31]  M. Karplus,et al.  A hierarchy of timescales in protein dynamics is linked to enzyme catalysis , 2007, Nature.

[32]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Pocketome via Comprehensive Identification and Classification of Ligand Binding Envelopes* , 2005, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[33]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Biased probability Monte Carlo conformational searches and electrostatic calculations for peptides and proteins. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  Modesto Orozco,et al.  A consensus view of protein dynamics , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Tirion,et al.  Large Amplitude Elastic Motions in Proteins from a Single-Parameter, Atomic Analysis. , 1996, Physical review letters.

[36]  György M. Keserü,et al.  Ensemble Docking into Flexible Active Sites. Critical Evaluation of FlexE against JNK-3 and beta-Secretase , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[37]  Heinz Sklenar,et al.  Harmonic modes as variables to approximately account for receptor flexibility in ligand-receptor docking simulations: Application to DNA minor groove ligand complex , 1999, J. Comput. Chem..

[38]  R. Brüschweiler Collective protein dynamics and nuclear spin relaxation , 1995 .

[39]  Heather A Carlson,et al.  Incorporating protein flexibility in structure-based drug discovery: using HIV-1 protease as a test case. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[40]  Thomas A. Halgren Merck molecular force field. I. Basis, form, scope, parameterization, and performance of MMFF94 , 1996, J. Comput. Chem..

[41]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Flexible ligand docking to multiple receptor conformations: a practical alternative. , 2008, Current opinion in structural biology.

[42]  A Kitao,et al.  Harmonic and anharmonic aspects in the dynamics of BPTI: A normal mode analysis and principal component analysis , 1994, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[43]  P. Chacón,et al.  Thorough validation of protein normal mode analysis: a comparative study with essential dynamics. , 2007, Structure.

[44]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Conformational Sampling of Protein Flexibility in Generalized Coordinates: Application to Ligand Docking , 2005 .

[45]  M. Karplus,et al.  Native proteins are surface-molten solids: application of the Lindemann criterion for the solid versus liquid state. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[46]  Oliver F. Lange,et al.  Recognition Dynamics Up to Microseconds Revealed from an RDC-Derived Ubiquitin Ensemble in Solution , 2008, Science.

[47]  I. Bahar,et al.  Normal mode analysis : theory and applications to biological and chemical systems , 2005 .

[48]  Martin Karplus,et al.  Molecular dynamics of biological macromolecules: A brief history and perspective , 2003, Biopolymers.

[49]  K C Holmes,et al.  Normal modes as refinement parameters for the F-actin model. , 1995, Biophysical journal.

[50]  Sophie Sacquin-Mora,et al.  Locating the active sites of enzymes using mechanical properties , 2007, Proteins.

[51]  N. Go,et al.  Dynamics of a small globular protein in terms of low-frequency vibrational modes. , 1983, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[52]  Rommie E. Amaro,et al.  An improved relaxed complex scheme for receptor flexibility in computer-aided drug design , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[53]  M L Teodoro,et al.  Conformational flexibility models for the receptor in structure based drug design. , 2003, Current pharmaceutical design.

[54]  Jens Meiler,et al.  ROSETTALIGAND: Protein–small molecule docking with full side‐chain flexibility , 2006, Proteins.

[55]  J A McCammon,et al.  Accommodating protein flexibility in computational drug design. , 2000, Molecular pharmacology.

[56]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[57]  Yi Wang,et al.  Electrostatic funneling of substrate in mitochondrial inner membrane carriers , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[58]  Heather A Carlson,et al.  Exploring experimental sources of multiple protein conformations in structure-based drug design. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[59]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Detailed ab initio prediction of lysozyme–antibody complex with 1.6 Å accuracy , 1994, Nature Structural Biology.

[60]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[61]  D. Pérahia,et al.  Normal mode analysis as a prerequisite for drug design: Application to matrix metalloproteinases inhibitors , 2006, FEBS letters.

[62]  D. Oesterhelt,et al.  Dynamics of different functional parts of bacteriorhodopsin: H-2H labeling and neutron scattering. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[63]  H. Berendsen,et al.  Essential dynamics of proteins , 1993, Proteins.

[64]  Steven Hayward,et al.  Normal modes and essential dynamics. , 2008, Methods in molecular biology.

[65]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  Target flexibility: an emerging consideration in drug discovery and design. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[66]  M. Zacharias,et al.  Protein-ligand docking accounting for receptor side chain and global flexibility in normal modes: evaluation on kinase inhibitor cross docking. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[67]  K A Dill,et al.  The effect of multiple binding modes on empirical modeling of ligand docking to proteins , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[68]  Rommie E. Amaro,et al.  Ensemble-Based Virtual Screening Reveals Potential Novel Antiviral Compounds for Avian Influenza Neuraminidase , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[69]  D. ben-Avraham,et al.  Normal mode analysis of G-actin. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[70]  Tommy Liljefors,et al.  Prediction of the receptor conformation for iGluR2 agonist binding: QM/MM docking to an extensive conformational ensemble generated using normal mode analysis. , 2008, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[71]  Hualiang Jiang,et al.  Induced‐fit or preexisting equilibrium dynamics? Lessons from protein crystallography and MD simulations on acetylcholinesterase and implications for structure‐based drug design , 2008, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[73]  M. Karplus,et al.  Harmonic dynamics of proteins: normal modes and fluctuations in bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. , 1983, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[74]  Martin Zacharias,et al.  Rapid protein–ligand docking using soft modes from molecular dynamics simulations to account for protein deformability: Binding of FK506 to FKBP , 2004, Proteins.

[75]  A. Laio,et al.  Flexible docking in solution using metadynamics. , 2005, Journal of the American Chemical Society.