CRDS: Consensus Reverse Docking System for target fishing

MOTIVATION Identification of putative drug targets is a critical step for explaining the mechanism of drug action against multiple targets, finding new therapeutic indications for existing drugs, and unveiling the adverse drug reactions. One important approach is to use the molecular docking. However, its widespread utilization has been hindered by the lack of easy-to-use public servers. Therefore, it is vital to develop a streamlined computational tool for target prediction by molecular docking on a large scale. RESULTS We present a fully automated web tool named CRDS (Consensus Reverse Docking System) which predicts potential interaction sites for a given drug. To improve hit rates, we developed a strategy of consensus scoring. CRDS carries out reverse docking against 5,254 candidate protein structures using three different scoring functions (GoldScore, Vina, and LeDock from GOLD version 5.7.1, AutoDock Vina version 1.1.2, and LeDock version 1.0, respectively), and those scores are combined into a single score named CDS (Consensus Docking Score). The web server provides the list of top fifty predicted interaction sites, docking conformations, ten most significant pathways, and the distribution of consensus scores. AVAILABILITY The web server is available at http://pbil.kaist.ac.kr/CRDS. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

[1]  Henning Hermjakob,et al.  The Reactome pathway Knowledgebase , 2015, Nucleic acids research.

[2]  Didier Rognan,et al.  sc-PDB: a 3D-database of ligandable binding sites—10 years on , 2014, Nucleic Acids Res..

[3]  P. Clemons,et al.  Target identification and mechanism of action in chemical biology and drug discovery. , 2013, Nature chemical biology.

[4]  Pedro J. Ballester,et al.  Performance of machine-learning scoring functions in structure-based virtual screening , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[5]  Dongsup Kim,et al.  Using reverse docking for target identification and its applications for drug discovery , 2016, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[6]  Kwong-Sak Leung,et al.  MolTarPred: A web tool for comprehensive target prediction with reliability estimation , 2019, Chemical biology & drug design.

[7]  Masakazu Sekijima,et al.  Improved Method of Structure-Based Virtual Screening via Interaction-Energy-Based Learning , 2019, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  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..

[9]  Zhenming Liu,et al.  The scoring bias in reverse docking and the score normalization strategy to improve success rate of target fishing , 2017, PloS one.

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

[11]  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.

[12]  Zhihai Liu,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions on a Diverse Test Set , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[13]  Corey Nislow,et al.  Recent advances and method development for drug target identification. , 2010, Trends in pharmacological sciences.