Parameter Choice Matters: Validating Probe Parameters for Use in Mixed-Solvent Simulations

Probe mapping is a common approach for identifying potential binding sites in structure-based drug design; however, it typically relies on energy minimizations of probes in the gas phase and a static protein structure. The mixed-solvent molecular dynamics (MixMD) approach was recently developed to account for full protein flexibility and solvation effects in hot-spot mapping. Our first study used only acetonitrile as a probe, and here, we have augmented the set of functional group probes through careful testing and parameter validation. A diverse range of probes are needed in order to map complex binding interactions. A small variation in probe parameters can adversely effect mixed-solvent behavior, which we highlight with isopropanol. We tested 11 solvents to identify six with appropriate behavior in TIP3P water to use as organic probes in the MixMD method. In addition to acetonitrile and isopropanol, we have identified acetone, N-methylacetamide, imidazole, and pyrimidine. These probe solvents will enable MixMD studies to recover hydrogen-bonding sites, hydrophobic pockets, protein–protein interactions, and aromatic hotspots. Also, we show that ternary-solvent systems can be incorporated within a single simulation. Importantly, these binary and ternary solvents do not require artificial repulsion terms like other methods. Within merely 5 ns, layered solvent boxes become evenly mixed for soluble probes. We used radial distribution functions to evaluate solvent behavior, determine adequate mixing, and confirm the absence of phase separation. We recommend that radial distribution functions should be used to assess adequate sampling in all mixed-solvent techniques rather than the current practice of examining the solvent ratios at the edges of the solvent box.

[1]  T. Darden,et al.  Particle mesh Ewald: An N⋅log(N) method for Ewald sums in large systems , 1993 .

[2]  K. Dill,et al.  Binding of small-molecule ligands to proteins: "what you see" is not always "what you get". , 2009, Structure.

[3]  Heather A. Carlson,et al.  Improving Protocols for Protein Mapping through Proper Comparison to Crystallography Data , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  Heather A Carlson,et al.  Small molecule inhibitors of the MDM2-p53 interaction discovered by ensemble-based receptor models. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[5]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  Computational analysis of protein hotspots. , 2010, ACS medicinal chemistry letters.

[6]  D. Ringe,et al.  Locating and characterizing binding sites on proteins , 1996, Nature Biotechnology.

[7]  Ivet Bahar,et al.  Druggability Assessment of Allosteric Proteins by Dynamics Simulations in the Presence of Probe Molecules , 2012, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation.

[8]  Mihaly Mezei,et al.  Simulated Annealing of Chemical Potential: A General Procedure for Locating Bound Waters. Application to the Study of the Differential Hydration Propensities of the Major and Minor Grooves of DNA , 1996 .

[9]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water , 1983 .

[10]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Reproducing Crystal Binding Modes of Ligand Functional Groups Using Site-Identification by Ligand Competitive Saturation (SILCS) Simulations , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[11]  William L. Jorgensen,et al.  Development of an All-Atom Force Field for Heterocycles. Properties of Liquid Pyrrole, Furan, Diazoles, and Oxazoles , 1998 .

[12]  P. Kollman,et al.  Structure and Properties of Neat Liquids Using Nonadditive Molecular Dynamics: Water, Methanol, and N-Methylacetamide , 1995 .

[13]  I. Bahar,et al.  Druggability Assessment of Allosteric Proteins by Dynamics Simulations in the Presence of Probe Molecules. , 2013, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[14]  P. Goodford A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. , 1985, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[15]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  Analysis of Flexibility and Hotspots in Bcl-xL and Mcl-1 Proteins for the Design of Selective Small-Molecule Inhibitors. , 2012, ACS medicinal chemistry letters.

[16]  M.,et al.  Optimized Intermolecular Potential Functions for Liquid Alcohols , 2001 .

[17]  Vincenzo Barone,et al.  Spectroscopic properties in the liquid phase: combining high-level ab initio calculations and classical molecular dynamics. , 2006, Chemphyschem : a European journal of chemical physics and physical chemistry.

[18]  B. Brooks,et al.  Constant pressure molecular dynamics simulation: The Langevin piston method , 1995 .

[19]  Katrina W Lexa,et al.  Full protein flexibility is essential for proper hot-spot mapping. , 2011, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[20]  J. Andrew McCammon,et al.  Method for Including the Dynamic Fluctuations of a Protein in Computer-Aided Drug Design , 1999 .

[21]  K. Takano ON SOLUTION OF , 1983 .

[22]  William L. Jorgensen,et al.  PERFORMANCE OF THE AMBER94, MMFF94, AND OPLS-AA FORCE FIELDS FOR MODELING ORGANIC LIQUIDS , 1996 .

[23]  Heather A. Carlson,et al.  C2BIP#080053 643..652 , 2008 .

[24]  Rommie E. Amaro,et al.  Computational identification of a transiently open L1/S3 pocket for reactivation of mutant p53 , 2013, Nature Communications.

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

[26]  Peter A. Kollman,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulation studies of liquid acetonitrile: New six-site model , 2000, J. Comput. Chem..

[27]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Computational Fragment-Based Binding Site Identification by Ligand Competitive Saturation , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[28]  F. J. Luque,et al.  Binding site detection and druggability index from first principles. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[29]  G. Ciccotti,et al.  Numerical Integration of the Cartesian Equations of Motion of a System with Constraints: Molecular Dynamics of n-Alkanes , 1977 .

[30]  H. Berendsen,et al.  Molecular dynamics with coupling to an external bath , 1984 .

[31]  Collin M. Stultz,et al.  MCSS functionality maps for a flexible protein , 1999, Proteins.

[32]  William L. Jorgensen,et al.  Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[33]  William L. Jorgensen,et al.  Development of an all-atom force field for heterocycles. Properties of liquid pyridine and diazenes , 1998 .

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

[35]  Julian Tirado-Rives,et al.  Molecular modeling of organic and biomolecular systems using BOSS and MCPRO , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[36]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  Development and Testing of the OPLS All-Atom Force Field on Conformational Energetics and Properties of Organic Liquids , 1996 .

[37]  S Vajda,et al.  Continuum electrostatic analysis of preferred solvation sites around proteins in solution , 2000, Proteins.

[38]  Karen N. Allen,et al.  An Experimental Approach to Mapping the Binding Surfaces of Crystalline Proteins , 1996 .

[39]  P. Kollman,et al.  A Second Generation Force Field for the Simulation of Proteins, Nucleic Acids, and Organic Molecules , 1995 .

[40]  Ranbir Singh,et al.  J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem) , 1996 .

[41]  Heather A Carlson,et al.  Refining the multiple protein structure pharmacophore method: consistency across three independent HIV-1 protease models. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[42]  Peter A. Kollman,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulation studies of liquid acetonitrile: New six‐site model , 2000, J. Comput. Chem..