CANDOCK: Chemical atomic network based hierarchical flexible docking algorithm using generalized statistical potentials

Small molecule docking has proven to be invaluable for drug design and discovery. However, existing docking methods have several limitations, such as, ignoring interactions with essential components in the chemical environment of the binding pocket (e.g. cofactors, metal-ions, etc.), incomplete sampling of chemically relevant ligand conformational space, and they are unable to consistently correlate docking scores of the best binding pose with experimental binding affinities. We present CANDOCK, a novel docking algorithm that utilizes a hierarchical approach to reconstruct ligands from an atomic grid using graph theory and generalized statistical potential functions to sample chemical relevant ligand conformations. Our algorithm accounts for protein flexibility, solvent, metal ions and cofactors interactions in the binding pocket that are traditionally ignored by current methods. We evaluate the algorithm on the PDBbind and Astex proteins to show its ability to reproduce the binding mode of the ligands that is independent of the initial ligand conformation in these benchmarks. Finally, we identify the best selector and ranker potential functions, such that, the statistical score of best selected docked pose correlates with the experimental binding affinities of the ligands for any given protein target. Our results indicate that CANDOCK is a generalized flexible docking method that addresses several limitations of current docking methods by considering all interactions in the chemical environment of a binding pocket for correlating the best docked pose with biological activity.

[1]  Michael M. Mysinger,et al.  Directory of Useful Decoys, Enhanced (DUD-E): Better Ligands and Decoys for Better Benchmarking , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[2]  Yu-chian Chen Beware of docking! , 2015, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[3]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  FlexE: efficient molecular docking considering protein structure variations. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  R. Woods,et al.  Vina-Carb: Improving Glycosidic Angles during Carbohydrate Docking. , 2016, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[5]  I. Luque,et al.  Structural stability of binding sites: Consequences for binding affinity and allosteric effects , 2000, Proteins.

[6]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Computational Multitarget Drug Discovery , 2012 .

[7]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Efficient molecular docking of NMR structures: Application to HIV‐1 protease , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[8]  Zhihai Liu,et al.  Forging the Basis for Developing Protein-Ligand Interaction Scoring Functions. , 2017, Accounts of chemical research.

[9]  R. Samudrala,et al.  Distal Effect of Amino Acid Substitutions in CYP2C9 Polymorphic Variants Causes Differences in Interatomic Interactions against (S)-Warfarin , 2013, PloS one.

[10]  Yan Li,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions: The CASF-2016 Update , 2018, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[11]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  A generalized knowledge‐based discriminatory function for biomolecular interactions , 2009, Proteins.

[12]  Rafael Najmanovich,et al.  FlexAID: Revisiting Docking on Non-Native-Complex Structures , 2015, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[13]  Daniel A. Gschwend,et al.  Orientational sampling and rigid‐body minimization in molecular docking , 1993, Proteins.

[14]  Hong Wang,et al.  Can the Energy Gap in the Protein-Ligand Binding Energy Landscape Be Used as a Descriptor in Virtual Ligand Screening? , 2012, PloS one.

[15]  Dan Li,et al.  Comprehensive evaluation of ten docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes: the prediction accuracy of sampling power and scoring power. , 2016, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[16]  Kenji Onodera,et al.  Evaluations of Molecular Docking Programs for Virtual Screening , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[17]  Feng Ding,et al.  Rapid Flexible Docking Using a Stochastic Rotamer Library of Ligands , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[18]  Richard D. Taylor,et al.  Improved protein–ligand docking using GOLD , 2003, Proteins.

[19]  Matthew P. Repasky,et al.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[20]  W Patrick Walters,et al.  A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance , 2004, Proteins.

[21]  Yongbo Hu,et al.  Comparison of Several Molecular Docking Programs: Pose Prediction and Virtual Screening Accuracy , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[22]  Elizabeth Yuriev,et al.  Latest developments in molecular docking: 2010–2011 in review , 2013, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[23]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Rappertk: a versatile engine for discrete restraint-based conformational sampling of macromolecules , 2007, BMC Structural Biology.

[24]  P. Kollman,et al.  Automatic atom type and bond type perception in molecular mechanical calculations. , 2006, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[25]  Suzanne C Brewerton,et al.  The use of protein-ligand interaction fingerprints in docking. , 2008, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[26]  Feng Ding,et al.  CSAR Benchmark of Flexible MedusaDock in Affinity Prediction and Nativelike Binding Pose Selection , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[27]  Cheng Wang,et al.  Improving scoring‐docking‐screening powers of protein–ligand scoring functions using random forest , 2017, J. Comput. Chem..

[28]  A. Caflisch,et al.  Discovery of ZAP70 inhibitors by high-throughput docking into a conformation of its kinase domain generated by molecular dynamics. , 2013, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[29]  A. A. Lagunin,et al.  Computer-aided prediction of xenobiotic metabolism in humans , 2016 .

[30]  Jorge Nocedal,et al.  On the limited memory BFGS method for large scale optimization , 1989, Math. Program..

[31]  J. Irwin,et al.  Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[32]  G. Chopra,et al.  Identification of New FLT3 Inhibitors That Potently Inhibit AML Cell Lines via an Azo Click-It/Staple-It Approach. , 2017, ACS medicinal chemistry letters.

[33]  Richard D. Smith,et al.  CSAR 2014: A Benchmark Exercise Using Unpublished Data from Pharma , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[34]  Aleksey A. Porollo,et al.  Survey of public domain software for docking simulations and virtual screening , 2011, Human Genomics.

[35]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Exploring Polypharmacology in Drug Discovery and Repurposing Using the CANDO Platform. , 2016, Current pharmaceutical design.

[36]  Amedeo Caflisch,et al.  Docking small ligands in flexible binding sites , 1998, J. Comput. Chem..

[37]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Novel paradigms for drug discovery: computational multitarget screening. , 2008, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[38]  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..

[39]  Mohamed A. Khamis,et al.  Comparative assessment of machine-learning scoring functions on PDBbind 2013 , 2015, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..

[40]  Santiago Vilar,et al.  Medicinal chemistry and the molecular operating environment (MOE): application of QSAR and molecular docking to drug discovery. , 2008, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

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

[42]  Elaine C. Meng,et al.  Determination of molecular topology and atomic hybridization states from heavy atom coordinates , 1991 .

[43]  Christopher M. Summa,et al.  Solvent dramatically affects protein structure refinement , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[44]  Miklos Feher,et al.  Effect of Input Differences on the Results of Docking Calculations , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[45]  Vijay S. Pande,et al.  OpenMM 7: Rapid development of high performance algorithms for molecular dynamics , 2016, bioRxiv.

[46]  Janez Konc,et al.  An improved branch and bound algorithm for the maximum clique problem , 2007 .

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

[48]  Paul N. Mortenson,et al.  Diverse, high-quality test set for the validation of protein-ligand docking performance. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[49]  Junmei Wang,et al.  Development and testing of a general amber force field , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[50]  Richard D. Smith,et al.  CSAR Benchmark Exercise 2011–2012: Evaluation of Results from Docking and Relative Ranking of Blinded Congeneric Series , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[51]  Leslie A Kuhn,et al.  Side‐chain flexibility in protein–ligand binding: The minimal rotation hypothesis , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[53]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Protein‐based virtual screening of chemical databases. II. Are homology models of g‐protein coupled receptors suitable targets? , 2002, Proteins.

[54]  A. Butte,et al.  Predicting Adverse Drug Reactions Using Publicly Available PubChem BioAssay Data , 2011, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[55]  Frank H. Allen,et al.  Cambridge Structural Database , 2002 .

[56]  William J. Allen,et al.  DOCK 6: Impact of new features and current docking performance , 2015, J. Comput. Chem..

[57]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  CANDO and the infinite drug discovery frontier. , 2014, Drug discovery today.

[58]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy , 2004, Proteins.

[59]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Identification of potential multitarget antimalarial drugs. , 2005, JAMA.

[60]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Computational Prediction of Metabolism: Sites, Products, SAR, P450 Enzyme Dynamics, and Mechanisms , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[61]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Combating Ebola with Repurposed Therapeutics Using the CANDO Platform , 2016, Molecules.

[62]  Xavier Barril,et al.  rDock: A Fast, Versatile and Open Source Program for Docking Ligands to Proteins and Nucleic Acids , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[63]  Dieter Lang,et al.  Predicting drug metabolism: experiment and/or computation? , 2015, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[64]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Computational chemoproteomics to understand the role of selected psychoactives in treating mental health indications , 2019, Scientific Reports.

[65]  Kam Y. J. Zhang,et al.  Structural basis for the activity of drugs that inhibit phosphodiesterases. , 2004, Structure.

[66]  R Samudrala,et al.  Strategic Protein Target Analysis for Developing Drugs to Stop Dental Caries , 2012, Advances in dental research.

[67]  Z. Deng,et al.  Structural interaction fingerprint (SIFt): a novel method for analyzing three-dimensional protein-ligand binding interactions. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[68]  Yuri Pevzner,et al.  Fragment-Based Docking: Development of the CHARMMing Web User Interface as a Platform for Computer-Aided Drug Design , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[69]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  The RCSB Protein Data Bank: views of structural biology for basic and applied research and education , 2014, Nucleic Acids Res..

[70]  Arthur J Olson,et al.  Fragment-Based Analysis of Ligand Dockings Improves Classification of Actives , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[71]  Thomas E. Cheatham,et al.  Quantum mechanically derived AMBER‐compatible heme parameters for various states of the cytochrome P450 catalytic cycle , 2012, J. Comput. Chem..

[72]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Multiscale modelling of relationships between protein classes and drug behavior across all diseases using the CANDO platform. , 2015, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

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

[74]  Michael Levitt,et al.  KoBaMIN: a knowledge-based minimization web server for protein structure refinement , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[75]  Michael Levitt,et al.  Consistent refinement of submitted models at CASP using a knowledge‐based potential , 2010, Proteins.

[76]  Simon S. J. Cross Improved FlexX Docking Using FlexS-Determined Base Fragment Placement , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..