Prediction of cyclin-dependent kinase 2 inhibitor potency using the fragment molecular orbital method

BackgroundThe reliable and robust estimation of ligand binding affinity continues to be a challenge in drug design. Many current methods rely on molecular mechanics (MM) calculations which do not fully explain complex molecular interactions. Full quantum mechanical (QM) computation of the electronic state of protein-ligand complexes has recently become possible by the latest advances in the development of linear-scaling QM methods such as the ab initio fragment molecular orbital (FMO) method. This approximate molecular orbital method is sufficiently fast that it can be incorporated into the development cycle during structure-based drug design for the reliable estimation of ligand binding affinity. Additionally, the FMO method can be combined with approximations for entropy and solvation to make it applicable for binding affinity prediction for a broad range of target and chemotypes.ResultsWe applied this method to examine the binding affinity for a series of published cyclin-dependent kinase 2 (CDK2) inhibitors. We calculated the binding affinity for 28 CDK2 inhibitors using the abinitio FMO method based on a number of X-ray crystal structures. The sum of the pair interaction energies (PIE) was calculated and used to explain the gas-phase enthalpic contribution to binding. The correlation of the ligand potencies to the protein-ligand interaction energies gained from FMO was examined and was seen to give a good correlation which outperformed three MM force field based scoring functions used to appoximate the free energy of binding. Although the FMO calculation allows for the enthalpic component of binding interactions to be understood at the quantum level, as it is an in vacuo single point calculation, the entropic component and solvation terms are neglected. For this reason a more accurate and predictive estimate for binding free energy was desired. Therefore, additional terms used to describe the protein-ligand interactions were then calculated to improve the correlation of the FMO derived values to experimental free energies of binding. These terms were used to account for the polar and non-polar solvation of the molecule estimated by the Poisson-Boltzmann equation and the solvent accessible surface area (SASA), respectively, as well as a correction term for ligand entropy. A quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) model obtained by Partial Least Squares projection to latent structures (PLS) analysis of the ligand potencies and the calculated terms showed a strong correlation (r2 = 0.939, q2 = 0.896) for the 14 molecule test set which had a Pearson rank order correlation of 0.97. A training set of a further 14 molecules was well predicted (r2 = 0.842), and could be used to obtain meaningful estimations of the binding free energy.ConclusionsOur results show that binding energies calculated with the FMO method correlate well with published data. Analysis of the terms used to derive the FMO energies adds greater understanding to the binding interactions than can be gained by MM methods. Combining this information with additional terms and creating a scaled model to describe the data results in more accurate predictions of ligand potencies than the absolute values obtained by FMO alone.

[1]  Yuto Komeiji,et al.  Visualization analysis of inter-fragment interaction energies of CRP-cAMP-DNA complex based on the fragment molecular orbital method. , 2007, Biophysical chemistry.

[2]  Thomas Steinbrecher,et al.  A multistep approach to structure-based drug design: studying ligand binding at the human neutrophil elastase. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[3]  P. Charifson,et al.  Are free energy calculations useful in practice? A comparison with rapid scoring functions for the p38 MAP kinase protein system. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  Araz Jakalian,et al.  Fast, efficient generation of high‐quality atomic charges. AM1‐BCC model: I. Method , 2000 .

[5]  K. Kitaura,et al.  Fragment molecular orbital method: an approximate computational method for large molecules , 1999 .

[6]  Robert B. Hermann,et al.  Theory of hydrophobic bonding. II. Correlation of hydrocarbon solubility in water with solvent cavity surface area , 1972 .

[7]  M. Gilson,et al.  Calculation of protein-ligand binding affinities. , 2007, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[8]  末永 正彦,et al.  PC GAMESSのための新しい計算化学統合環境 Facio の開発 , 2005 .

[9]  W. L. Jorgensen The Many Roles of Computation in Drug Discovery , 2004, Science.

[10]  Hui Li,et al.  The polarizable continuum model (PCM) interfaced with the fragment molecular orbital method (FMO) , 2006, J. Comput. Chem..

[11]  S. Wold,et al.  PLS-regression: a basic tool of chemometrics , 2001 .

[12]  M. Gilson,et al.  Ligand configurational entropy and protein binding , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Kaori Fukuzawa,et al.  Fragment molecular orbital method: use of approximate electrostatic potential , 2002 .

[14]  D A Dougherty,et al.  Cation-pi interactions in aromatics of biological and medicinal interest: electrostatic potential surfaces as a useful qualitative guide. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Kenneth M. Merz,et al.  Divide and Conquer Interaction Energy Decomposition , 1999 .

[16]  Kenneth M Merz,et al.  A Mixed QM/MM Scoring Function to Predict Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity. , 2010, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[17]  Christopher I. Bayly,et al.  Fast, efficient generation of high‐quality atomic charges. AM1‐BCC model: II. Parameterization and validation , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[18]  Yuto Komeiji,et al.  Ab initio fragment molecular orbital (FMO) method applied to analysis of the ligand-protein interaction in a pheromone-binding protein , 2005, Comput. Biol. Chem..

[19]  L. Amzel,et al.  Compensating Enthalpic and Entropic Changes Hinder Binding Affinity Optimization , 2007, Chemical biology & drug design.

[20]  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.

[21]  Hiroshi Chuman,et al.  Correlation Analyses on Binding Affinity of Sialic Acid Analogues with Influenza Virus Neuraminidase-1 Using ab Initio MO Calculations on Their Complex Structures , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

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

[23]  Masahiko Suenaga,et al.  Facio: New Computational Chemistry Environment for PC GAMESS , 2005 .

[24]  Robert Bell Hermann,et al.  Theory of Hydrophobic Bonding , 1974 .

[25]  Hiroshi Chuman,et al.  QSAR Study of Cyclic Urea Type HIV‐1 PR Inhibitors Using Ab Initio MO Calculation of Their Complex Structures with HIV‐1 PR , 2008 .

[26]  P. Kollman,et al.  Binding of a diverse set of ligands to avidin and streptavidin: an accurate quantitative prediction of their relative affinities by a combination of molecular mechanics and continuum solvent models. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[27]  Charles A. Laughton,et al.  A Study of CDK2 Inhibitors Using a Novel 3D‐QSAR Method Exploiting Receptor Flexibility , 2009 .

[28]  Yutaka Akiyama,et al.  Fragment molecular orbital method: application to polypeptides , 2000 .

[29]  Jeremy C. Smith,et al.  Can the calculation of ligand binding free energies be improved with continuum solvent electrostatics and an ideal‐gas entropy correction? , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[30]  Johan Åqvist,et al.  Ligand binding affinity prediction by linear interaction energy methods , 1998, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[31]  D. Beveridge,et al.  Free energy via molecular simulation: applications to chemical and biomolecular systems. , 1989, Annual review of biophysics and biophysical chemistry.

[32]  P. Charifson,et al.  Conformational analysis of drug-like molecules bound to proteins: an extensive study of ligand reorganization upon binding. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  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..

[34]  Pavel Hobza,et al.  On the Nature of Bonding in Lone Pair···π-Electron Complexes: CCSD(T)/Complete Basis Set Limit Calculations. , 2009, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[35]  W. Delano The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System , 2002 .

[36]  A Good,et al.  Structure-based virtual screening protocols. , 2001, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[37]  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..

[38]  Masami Uebayasi,et al.  Pair interaction molecular orbital method: an approximate computational method for molecular interactions , 1999 .

[39]  D. A. Dougherty,et al.  Cation-π interactions in structural biology , 1999 .

[40]  Jacob Kongsted,et al.  Ligand Affinities Estimated by Quantum Chemical Calculations. , 2010, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[41]  Anthony J. Stone,et al.  Computation of charge-transfer energies by perturbation theory , 1993 .

[42]  Masahiko Suenaga,et al.  Development of GUI for GAMESS / FMO Calculation , 2008 .

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

[44]  博文 渡邉,et al.  Comparison of binding affinity evaluations for FKBP ligands with state-of-the-art computational methods: FMO, QM/MM, MM-PB/SA and MP-CAFEE approaches , 2010 .

[45]  Kazuo Kitaura,et al.  Pair interaction energy decomposition analysis , 2007, J. Comput. Chem..

[46]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  SMall Molecule Growth 2001 (SMoG2001): an improved knowledge-based scoring function for protein-ligand interactions. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[47]  Mark S. Gordon,et al.  Chapter 41 – Advances in electronic structure theory: GAMESS a decade later , 2005 .

[48]  S. Hassan,et al.  A General Treatment of Solvent Effects Based on Screened Coulomb Potentials , 2000 .

[49]  Toshio Fujita,et al.  Novel Quantitative Structure-Activity Studies of HIV-1 Protease Inhibitors of the Cyclic Urea Type Using Descriptors Derived from Molecular Dynamics and Molecular Orbital Calculations , 2009 .

[50]  Kazumasa Honda,et al.  Origin of the Attraction and Directionality of the NH/π Interaction: Comparison with OH/π and CH/π Interactions , 2000 .

[51]  Karel Berka,et al.  Quantum Chemical Benchmark Energy and Geometry Database for Molecular Clusters and Complex Molecular Systems (www.begdb.com): A Users Manual and Examples , 2008 .

[52]  Kwang S. Kim,et al.  Theory and applications of computational chemistry : the first forty years , 2005 .

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

[54]  Yoshihisa Inoue,et al.  Cl–π Interactions in Protein–Ligand Complexes , 2009 .

[55]  A. Warshel,et al.  Calculations of antibody-antigen interactions: microscopic and semi-microscopic evaluation of the free energies of binding of phosphorylcholine analogs to McPC603. , 1992, Protein engineering.

[56]  Kenneth M Merz,et al.  Semiempirical Comparative Binding Energy Analysis (SE-COMBINE) of a Series of Trypsin Inhibitors. , 2006, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[57]  Marcel L. Verdonk,et al.  The consequences of translational and rotational entropy lost by small molecules on binding to proteins , 2002, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[58]  P. Kollman,et al.  Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. , 2000, Accounts of chemical research.

[59]  Paul G Wyatt,et al.  Identification of N-(4-piperidinyl)-4-(2,6-dichlorobenzoylamino)-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide (AT7519), a novel cyclin dependent kinase inhibitor using fragment-based X-ray crystallography and structure based drug design. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[60]  John Z H Zhang,et al.  Quantum mechanical map for protein-ligand binding with application to beta-trypsin/benzamidine complex. , 2004, The Journal of chemical physics.

[61]  Kenneth M. Merz,et al.  QMQSAR: Utilization of a semiempirical probe potential in a field‐based QSAR method , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[62]  Arieh Warshel,et al.  Modeling electrostatic effects in proteins. , 2006, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[63]  G. Klebe,et al.  Approaches to the description and prediction of the binding affinity of small-molecule ligands to macromolecular receptors. , 2002, Angewandte Chemie.

[64]  Jirí Cerný,et al.  Benchmark database of accurate (MP2 and CCSD(T) complete basis set limit) interaction energies of small model complexes, DNA base pairs, and amino acid pairs. , 2006, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[65]  Kenneth M. Merz,et al.  The Role of Polarization and Charge Transfer in the Solvation of Biomolecules , 1999 .

[66]  Hiroshi Chuman,et al.  Correlation Analyses on Binding Affinity of Substituted Benzenesulfonamides with Carbonic Anhydrase Using ab Initio MO Calculations on Their Complex Structures , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[67]  Mark S. Gordon,et al.  General atomic and molecular electronic structure system , 1993, J. Comput. Chem..

[68]  Xiao He,et al.  Quantum computational analysis for drug resistance of HIV‐1 reverse transcriptase to nevirapine through point mutations , 2005, Proteins.

[69]  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..

[70]  Christopher J. R. Illingworth,et al.  The effect of MM polarization on the QM/MM transition state stabilization: application to chorismate mutase , 2008 .

[71]  Chris-Kriton Skylaris,et al.  Protein-protein interactions from linear-scaling first-principles quantum-mechanical calculations , 2010 .

[72]  Junwei Zhang,et al.  VISCANA: Visualized Cluster Analysis of Protein-Ligand Interaction Based on the ab Initio Fragment Molecular Orbital Method for Virtual Ligand Screening , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[73]  Shigenori Tanaka,et al.  Intra‐ and intermolecular interactions between cyclic‐AMP receptor protein and DNA: Ab initio fragment molecular orbital study , 2006, J. Comput. Chem..

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

[75]  K. Merz,et al.  A quantum mechanics-based scoring function: study of zinc ion-mediated ligand binding. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[76]  Ryan P. A. Bettens,et al.  On the accurate reproduction of ab initio interaction energies between an enzyme and substrate , 2007 .

[77]  Hideaki Umeyama,et al.  The origin of hydrogen bonding. An energy decomposition study , 1977 .

[78]  Giulio Rastelli,et al.  Fast and accurate predictions of binding free energies using MM‐PBSA and MM‐GBSA , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[79]  K. Merz,et al.  Large-scale validation of a quantum mechanics based scoring function: predicting the binding affinity and the binding mode of a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[80]  B. Kuhn,et al.  Validation and use of the MM-PBSA approach for drug discovery. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[81]  K. Sharp,et al.  Macroscopic models of aqueous solutions : biological and chemical applications , 1993 .

[82]  Bing Wang,et al.  The role of quantum mechanics in structure-based drug design. , 2007, Drug discovery today.

[83]  Kazuo Kitaura,et al.  A new energy decomposition scheme for molecular interactions within the Hartree‐Fock approximation , 1976 .

[84]  E. Freire Do enthalpy and entropy distinguish first in class from best in class? , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[85]  M. Congreve,et al.  Recent developments in fragment-based drug discovery. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[86]  George M. Whitesides,et al.  Using a Convenient, Quantitative Model for Torsional Entropy To Establish Qualitative Trends for Molecular Processes That Restrict Conformational Freedom , 1998 .

[87]  Shigenori Tanaka,et al.  Incorporation of solvation effects into the fragment molecular orbital calculations with the Poisson–Boltzmann equation , 2010 .

[88]  A. Warshel,et al.  Examining methods for calculations of binding free energies: LRA, LIE, PDLD‐LRA, and PDLD/S‐LRA calculations of ligands binding to an HIV protease , 2000, Proteins.