Protein Flexibility in Docking-Based Virtual Screening: Discovery of Novel Lymphoid-Specific Tyrosine Phosphatase Inhibitors Using Multiple Crystal Structures

Incorporating protein flexibility is a major challenge for docking-based virtual screening. With an increasing number of available crystal structures, ensemble docking with multiple protein structures is an efficient approach to deal with protein flexibility. Herein, we report the successful application of a docking-based virtual screen using multiple crystal structures to discover novel inhibitors of lymphoid-specific tyrosine phosphatase (LYP), a potential drug target for autoimmune diseases. The appropriate use of multiple protein structures allowed a better enrichment than a single structure in the recovery of known inhibitors. Subsequently, an optimal ensemble of LYP structures was selected and used in docking-based virtual screening. Eight novel LYP inhibitors (IC50 ranging from 7.95 to 56.6 μM) were identified among 23 hit compounds. Further studies demonstrated that the most active compound B15 possessed some selectivity over other protein phosphatases and could effectively up-regulate TCR (T cell receptor)-mediated signaling in Jurkat T cells. These novel hits not only provided good starting points for the development of therapeutic agents useful in autoimmune diseases but also demonstrated the advantages of choosing an appropriate ensemble of protein structures in docking-based virtual screening over using a single protein conformation.

[1]  Gerrit Groenhof,et al.  GROMACS: Fast, flexible, and free , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[2]  Xuben Hou,et al.  Fast identification of novel lymphoid tyrosine phosphatase inhibitors using target-ligand interaction-based virtual screening. , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[3]  Arthur J. Olson,et al.  AutoDock4Zn: An Improved AutoDock Force Field for Small-Molecule Docking to Zinc Metalloproteins , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  Nunzio Bottini,et al.  Discovery of a novel series of inhibitors of lymphoid tyrosine phosphatase with activity in human T cells. , 2011, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[5]  W. Chen,et al.  Cadmium is a potent inhibitor of PPM phosphatases and targets the M1 binding site , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[6]  T. Martin Schmeing,et al.  An induced-fit mechanism to promote peptide bond formation and exclude hydrolysis of peptidyl-tRNA , 2005, Nature.

[7]  Tingjun Hou,et al.  Assessing an Ensemble Docking-Based Virtual Screening Strategy for Kinase Targets by Considering Protein Flexibility , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  Ajay N. Jain Surflex-Dock 2.1: Robust performance from ligand energetic modeling, ring flexibility, and knowledge-based search , 2007, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[9]  A. Fedorov,et al.  Crystal Structure of PTP1B Complexed with a Potent and Selective Bidentate Inhibitor* , 2003, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[10]  Nunzio Bottini,et al.  A potent and selective small-molecule inhibitor for the lymphoid-specific tyrosine phosphatase (LYP), a target associated with autoimmune diseases. , 2013, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[11]  Chenglong Li,et al.  Novel Inhibitor Discovery through Virtual Screening against Multiple Protein Conformations Generated via Ligand-Directed Modeling: A Maternal Embryonic Leucine Zipper Kinase Example , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

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

[13]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Growth of Ligand-Target Interaction Data in ChEMBL Is Associated with Increasing and Activity Measurement-Dependent Compound Promiscuity , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[14]  Nunzio Bottini,et al.  A functional variant of lymphoid tyrosine phosphatase is associated with type I diabetes , 2004, Nature Genetics.

[15]  Irwin D. Kuntz,et al.  Development and validation of a modular, extensible docking program: DOCK 5 , 2006, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[16]  N. P. Todorov,et al.  Receptor flexibility in de novo ligand design and docking. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[17]  Natasja Brooijmans,et al.  Molecular recognition and docking algorithms. , 2003, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[18]  Wen Hwa Lee,et al.  Large-Scale Structural Analysis of the Classical Human Protein Tyrosine Phosphatome , 2009, Cell.

[19]  A. Magrini,et al.  The association of PTPN22 polymorphism with endometriosis: effect of genetic and clinical factors. , 2013, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[20]  L. Nilsson,et al.  Structure and Dynamics of the TIP3P, SPC, and SPC/E Water Models at 298 K , 2001 .

[21]  Thomas Mendgen,et al.  Privileged scaffolds or promiscuous binders: a comparative study on rhodanines and related heterocycles in medicinal chemistry. , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  Andy Hudmon,et al.  Structure, inhibitor, and regulatory mechanism of Lyp, a lymphoid-specific tyrosine phosphatase implicated in autoimmune diseases , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  Freddie R Salsbury,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulations of protein dynamics and their relevance to drug discovery. , 2010, Current opinion in pharmacology.

[24]  Yan Li,et al.  Discovery of Novel Checkpoint Kinase 1 Inhibitors by Virtual Screening Based on Multiple Crystal Structures , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[25]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Recipes for the Selection of Experimental Protein Conformations for Virtual Screening , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[26]  R. Dror,et al.  Improved side-chain torsion potentials for the Amber ff99SB protein force field , 2010, Proteins.

[27]  J. Williamson Induced fit in RNA–protein recognition , 2000, Nature Structural Biology.

[28]  L. Klaman,et al.  Ertiprotafib Improves Glycemic Control and Lowers Lipids via Multiple Mechanisms , 2005, Molecular Pharmacology.

[29]  Joanna M. Sasin,et al.  Protein Tyrosine Phosphatases in the Human Genome , 2004, Cell.

[30]  Wei Cui,et al.  Unraveling the Allosteric Inhibition Mechanism of PTP1B by Free Energy Calculation Based on Umbrella Sampling , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[31]  J. Baell,et al.  New substructure filters for removal of pan assay interference compounds (PAINS) from screening libraries and for their exclusion in bioassays. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[32]  Conrad C. Huang,et al.  UCSF Chimera—A visualization system for exploratory research and analysis , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[33]  Nunzio Bottini,et al.  Tyrosine phosphatase PTPN22: multifunctional regulator of immune signaling, development, and disease. , 2014, Annual review of immunology.

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

[35]  Lutz Tautz,et al.  In Silico Screening for PTPN22 Inhibitors: Active Hits from an Inactive Phosphatase Conformation , 2009, ChemMedChem.

[36]  Berk Hess,et al.  P-LINCS:  A Parallel Linear Constraint Solver for Molecular Simulation. , 2008, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[37]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  AutoDock4 and AutoDockTools4: Automated docking with selective receptor flexibility , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

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

[39]  G. Maggiora,et al.  Molecular similarity in medicinal chemistry. , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[40]  Gang Liu,et al.  Selective protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B inhibitors: targeting the second phosphotyrosine binding site with non-carboxylic acid-containing ligands. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[42]  Q. Pang,et al.  Biochemical and Functional Studies of Lymphoid-Specific Tyrosine Phosphatase (Lyp) Variants S201F and R266W , 2012, PloS one.

[43]  Lazaros Mavridis,et al.  Comprehensive Comparison of Ligand-Based Virtual Screening Tools Against the DUD Data set Reveals Limitations of Current 3D Methods , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

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

[45]  Y. Sham,et al.  Rapid identification of Keap1-Nrf2 small-molecule inhibitors through structure-based virtual screening and hit-based substructure search. , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[47]  Richard D. Taylor,et al.  Modeling water molecules in protein-ligand docking using GOLD. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[49]  Somesh D. Sharma,et al.  Managing protein flexibility in docking and its applications. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[50]  Wolfgang Wenzel,et al.  Modeling loop backbone flexibility in receptor‐ligand docking simulations , 2012, J. Comput. Chem..

[51]  Yi Zhou,et al.  Enhancing the Sensitivity of Pharmacophore-Based Virtual Screening by Incorporating Customized ZBG Features: A Case Study Using Histone Deacetylase 8 , 2015, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[52]  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.

[53]  V. Goldfarb,et al.  Small molecule receptor protein tyrosine phosphatase γ (RPTPγ) ligands that inhibit phosphatase activity via perturbation of the tryptophan-proline-aspartate (WPD) loop. , 2011, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[54]  Jian Zhang,et al.  How to Improve Docking Accuracy of AutoDock4.2: A Case Study Using Different Electrostatic Potentials , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[55]  Naomie Salim,et al.  Combination of Fingerprint-Based Similarity Coefficients Using Data Fusion , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[56]  Johannes C. Hermann,et al.  Structure-based activity prediction for an enzyme of unknown function , 2007, Nature.

[57]  I. Huijbers,et al.  Rapid target gene validation in complex cancer mouse models using re-derived embryonic stem cells , 2014, EMBO molecular medicine.

[58]  Nunzio Bottini,et al.  Autoimmune-associated lymphoid tyrosine phosphatase is a gain-of-function variant , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[59]  J. Jenkins,et al.  A small-molecule inhibitor of the ribonucleolytic activity of human angiogenin that possesses antitumor activity , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[60]  Jacob D. Durrant,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulations and drug discovery , 2011, BMC Biology.

[61]  Jonathan W. Essex,et al.  Ensemble Docking into Multiple Crystallographically Derived Protein Structures: An Evaluation Based on the Statistical Analysis of Enrichments , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[62]  Nathanael Weill,et al.  Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules, 7. Impact of Protein Flexibility and Water Molecules on Docking-Based Virtual Screening Accuracy , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[63]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  The incorporation of protein flexibility and conformational energy penalties in docking screens to improve ligand discovery , 2014, Nature chemistry.

[64]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Virtual screening of chemical libraries , 2004, Nature.

[65]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Quo vadis, virtual screening? A comprehensive survey of prospective applications. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[66]  Tingjun Hou,et al.  Development and Evaluation of an Integrated Virtual Screening Strategy by Combining Molecular Docking and Pharmacophore Searching Based on Multiple Protein Structures , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[67]  Oliver Korb,et al.  Potential and Limitations of Ensemble Docking , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[68]  Dariusz Plewczynski,et al.  VoteDock: Consensus docking method for prediction of protein–ligand interactions , 2011, J. Comput. Chem..

[69]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Evaluation of the FLEXX incremental construction algorithm for protein–ligand docking , 1999, Proteins.

[70]  I. Kuntz,et al.  DOCK 6: combining techniques to model RNA-small molecule complexes. , 2009, RNA.

[71]  David E. Shaw,et al.  The future of molecular dynamics simulations in drug discovery , 2011, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[72]  Terry P Lybrand,et al.  Staggered Mesh Ewald: An extension of the Smooth Particle-Mesh Ewald method adding great versatility. , 2009, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[73]  B. Lie,et al.  LYP inhibits T cell activation when dissociated from CSK , 2012, Nature chemical biology.

[74]  D. Koshland The Key–Lock Theory and the Induced Fit Theory , 1995 .

[75]  Jeremy L Jenkins,et al.  Virtual screening to enrich hit lists from high‐throughput screening: A case study on small‐molecule inhibitors of angiogenin , 2002, Proteins.

[76]  M. Nieuwenhuyzen,et al.  A new approach to combretastatin D2. , 2006, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

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

[78]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Matched molecular pair analysis of small molecule microarray data identifies promiscuity cliffs and reveals molecular origins of extreme compound promiscuity. , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[79]  Peter M. Kasson,et al.  GROMACS 4.5: a high-throughput and highly parallel open source molecular simulation toolkit , 2013, Bioinform..

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

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

[82]  Ling Wang,et al.  Discovery of New Selective Human Aldose Reductase Inhibitors through Virtual Screening Multiple Binding Pocket Conformations , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..