Homology Model-Based Virtual Screening for GPCR Ligands Using Docking and Target-Biased Scoring

The current study investigates the combination of two recently reported techniques for the improvement of homology model-based virtual screening for G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) ligands. First, ligand-supported homology modeling was used to generate receptor models that were in agreement with mutagenesis data and structure-activity relationship information of the ligands. Second, interaction patterns from known ligands to the receptor were applied for scoring and rank ordering compounds from a virtual library using ligand-receptor interaction fingerprint-based similarity (IFS). Our approach was evaluated in retrospective virtual screening experiments for antagonists of the metabotropic glutamate receptor (mGluR) subtype 5. The results of our approach were compared to the results obtained by conventional scoring functions (Dock-Score, PMF-Score, Gold-Score, ChemScore, and FlexX-Score). The IFS lead to significantly higher enrichment rates, relative to the competing scoring functions. Though using a target-biased scoring approach, the results were not biased toward the chemical classes of the reference structures. Our results indicate that the presented approach has the potential to serve as a general setup for successful structure-based GPCR virtual screening.

[1]  Andreas Mühlemann,et al.  Determination of key amino acids implicated in the actions of allosteric modulation by 3,3'-difluorobenzaldazine on rat mGlu5 receptors. , 2006, European journal of pharmacology.

[2]  Markus H. J. Seifert Assessing the Discriminatory Power of Scoring Functions for Virtual Screening , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[3]  Shay Bar-Haim,et al.  G protein-coupled receptors: in silico drug discovery in 3D. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  T. Klabunde,et al.  Structure-based drug discovery using GPCR homology modeling: successful virtual screening for antagonists of the alpha1A adrenergic receptor. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[5]  Tobias Noeske,et al.  Allosteric Modulation of Family 3 GPCRs , 2006 .

[6]  W. Spooren,et al.  Novel allosteric antagonists shed light on mglu(5) receptors and CNS disorders. , 2001, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[7]  R. Glen,et al.  Molecular similarity: a key technique in molecular informatics. , 2004, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

[8]  Didier Rognan,et al.  High‐Throughput Modeling of Human G‐Protein Coupled Receptors: Amino Acid Sequence Alignment, Three‐Dimensional Model Building, and Receptor Library Screening. , 2004 .

[9]  R. Horuk,et al.  I want a new drug: G-protein-coupled receptors in drug development. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[10]  R. Wolf,et al.  Homology Modeling of the Transmembrane Domain of the Human Calcium Sensing Receptor and Localization of an Allosteric Binding Site* , 2004, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[11]  N. Cosford,et al.  Discovery of novel heteroarylazoles that are metabotropic glutamate subtype 5 receptor antagonists with anxiolytic activity. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[13]  I. Wilson,et al.  Virtual screening of human 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide ribonucleotide transformylase against the NCI diversity set by use of AutoDock to identify novel nonfolate inhibitors. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[14]  Robin Taylor,et al.  Comparing protein–ligand docking programs is difficult , 2005, Proteins.

[15]  F. Gasparini,et al.  The Non-competitive Antagonists 2-Methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)pyridine and 7-Hydroxyiminocyclopropan[b]chromen-1a-carboxylic Acid Ethyl Ester Interact with Overlapping Binding Pockets in the Transmembrane Region of Group I Metabotropic Glutamate Receptors* , 2000, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[16]  N. Cosford,et al.  3-[3-Fluoro-5-(5-pyridin-2-yl-2H-tetrazol-2-yl)phenyl]-4-methylpyridine: a highly potent and orally bioavailable metabotropic glutamate subtype 5 (mGlu5) receptor antagonist. , 2004, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[17]  Markus H. J. Seifert,et al.  Virtual high-throughput screening of molecular databases. , 2007, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[18]  C. Swanson,et al.  Metabotropic glutamate receptors as novel targets for anxiety and stress disorders , 2005, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[19]  Brian K. Kobilka,et al.  High resolution crystal structure of human B2-adrenergic G protein-coupled receptor. , 2007 .

[20]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Flexible docking under pharmacophore type constraints , 2002, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[21]  Frits Daeyaert,et al.  A pharmacophore docking algorithm and its application to the cross‐docking of 18 HIV‐NNRTI's in their binding pockets , 2004, Proteins.

[22]  Michal Vieth,et al.  SDOCKER: a method utilizing existing X-ray structures to improve docking accuracy. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[23]  Kenneth M. Johnson,et al.  Synthesis and structure-activity relationships of 3-[(2-methyl-1,3-thiazol-4-yl)ethynyl]pyridine analogues as potent, noncompetitive metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 antagonists; search for cocaine medications. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[24]  F. Gasparini,et al.  SIB-1757 and SIB-1893: selective, noncompetitive antagonists of metabotropic glutamate receptor type 5. , 1999, The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics.

[25]  Martin Ebeling,et al.  An Automated System for the Analysis of G Protein-Coupled Receptor Transmembrane Binding Pockets: Alignment, Receptor-Based Pharmacophores, and Their Application , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[26]  Xueliang Fang,et al.  Molecular modeling of the three-dimensional structure of dopamine 3 (D3) subtype receptor: discovery of novel and potent D3 ligands through a hybrid pharmacophore- and structure-based database searching approach. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[27]  X Fradera,et al.  Similarity‐driven flexible ligand docking , 2000, Proteins.

[28]  F. Gasparini,et al.  CPCCOEt, a noncompetitive metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 antagonist, inhibits receptor signaling without affecting glutamate binding. , 1999, Molecular pharmacology.

[29]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Searching for drug scaffolds with 3D pharmacophores and neural network ensembles. , 2007, Angewandte Chemie.

[30]  Richard D. Taylor,et al.  Virtual Screening Using Protein—Ligand Docking: Avoiding Artificial Enrichment. , 2004 .

[31]  R. Osman,et al.  Lactisole Interacts with the Transmembrane Domains of Human T1R3 to Inhibit Sweet Taste* , 2005, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[32]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  Computational elucidation of the structural basis of ligand binding to the dopamine 3 receptor through docking and homology modeling. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  Roman Osman,et al.  Identification of the Cyclamate Interaction Site within the Transmembrane Domain of the Human Sweet Taste Receptor Subunit T1R3*[boxs] , 2005, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[34]  Yael Marantz,et al.  Modeling the 3D structure of GPCRs: advances and application to drug discovery. , 2003, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[35]  Dehua Huang,et al.  5-[(2-Methyl-1,3-thiazol-4-yl)ethynyl]-2,3'-bipyridine: a highly potent, orally active metabotropic glutamate subtype 5 (mGlu5) receptor antagonist with anxiolytic activity. , 2004, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[36]  Jordi Mestres,et al.  Guided docking approaches to structure-based design and screening. , 2004, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[37]  Dehua Huang,et al.  Discovery of highly potent, selective, orally bioavailable, metabotropic glutamate subtype 5 (mGlu5) receptor antagonists devoid of cytochrome P450 1A2 inhibitory activity. , 2004, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[38]  J. Kew,et al.  Mutational Analysis and Molecular Modeling of the Allosteric Binding Site of a Novel, Selective, Noncompetitive Antagonist of the Metabotropic Glutamate 1 Receptor* , 2003, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[39]  D. J. Price,et al.  Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[40]  K. Palczewski,et al.  Crystal Structure of Rhodopsin: A G‐Protein‐Coupled Receptor , 2000, Science.

[41]  Peter L. Freddolino,et al.  Prediction of structure and function of G protein-coupled receptors , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  Li Xing,et al.  Evaluation and application of multiple scoring functions for a virtual screening experiment , 2004, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[43]  Peter Willett,et al.  Knowledge-Based Interaction Fingerprint Scoring: A Simple Method for Improving the Effectiveness of Fast Scoring Functions , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[44]  P. Malherbe,et al.  Mutational analysis and molecular modeling of the binding pocket of the metabotropic glutamate 5 receptor negative modulator 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)-pyridine. , 2003, Molecular pharmacology.

[45]  K. Jacobson,et al.  Identification by Site-directed Mutagenesis of Residues Involved in Ligand Recognition and Activation of the Human A3 Adenosine Receptor* , 2002, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[46]  D. Rognan,et al.  Modeling and Mutagenesis of the Binding Site of Calhex 231, a Novel Negative Allosteric Modulator of the Extracellular Ca2+-sensing Receptor* , 2003, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[47]  Paul D Lyne,et al.  Structure-based virtual screening: an overview. , 2002, Drug discovery today.

[48]  A. Hopkins,et al.  The druggable genome , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[49]  David Alagille,et al.  Functionalization at position 3 of the phenyl ring of the potent mGluR5 noncompetitive antagonists MPEP. , 2005, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[50]  Nagarajan Vaidehi,et al.  First principles predictions of the structure and function of g-protein-coupled receptors: validation for bovine rhodopsin. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[51]  Gerhard Hessler,et al.  Drug Design Strategies for Targeting G‐Protein‐Coupled Receptors , 2002, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[52]  Karolina Nilsson,et al.  Structure-activity relationship of thiopyrimidines as mGluR5 antagonists. , 2006, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[53]  Hege S. Beard,et al.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[54]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Positive and Negative Allosteric Modulators of the Ca2+-sensing Receptor Interact within Overlapping but Not Identical Binding Sites in the Transmembrane Domain* , 2004, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

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

[56]  N. Cosford,et al.  Expedited SAR study of an mGluR5 antagonists: generation of a focused library using a solution-phase Suzuki coupling methodology. , 2004, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[57]  Ilya Pyatkin,et al.  Positive and negative modulation of group I metabotropic glutamate receptors. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[58]  Martin Stahl,et al.  Comparison of the binding pockets of two chemically unrelated allosteric antagonists of the mGlu5 receptor and identification of crucial residues involved in the inverse agonism of MPEP , 2006, Journal of neurochemistry.

[59]  Didier Rognan,et al.  A chemogenomic analysis of the transmembrane binding cavity of human G‐protein‐coupled receptors , 2005, Proteins.

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

[61]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Scaffold‐Hopping: How Far Can You Jump? , 2006 .

[62]  Mark Washburn,et al.  3-[(2-Methyl-1,3-thiazol-4-yl)ethynyl]-pyridine: a potent and highly selective metabotropic glutamate subtype 5 receptor antagonist with anxiolytic activity. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[63]  Eric J Martin,et al.  Target-biased scoring approaches and expert systems in structure-based virtual screening. , 2004, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[64]  Qiang Zhang,et al.  Scaffold hopping through virtual screening using 2D and 3D similarity descriptors: ranking, voting, and consensus scoring. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[65]  Tom L. Blundell,et al.  Keynote review: Structural biology and drug discovery , 2005 .

[66]  Eckart Bindewald,et al.  A scoring function for docking ligands to low‐resolution protein structures , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[67]  G. Schneider,et al.  Scaffold‐Hopping Potential of Ligand‐Based Similarity Concepts , 2006, ChemMedChem.

[68]  H. Gohlke,et al.  Improving binding mode predictions by docking into protein-specifically adapted potential fields. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[69]  Maya Topf,et al.  PREDICT modeling and in‐silico screening for G‐protein coupled receptors , 2004, Proteins.

[70]  Ricardo L. Mancera,et al.  Expanded Interaction Fingerprint Method for Analyzing Ligand Binding Modes in Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[71]  Andreas Evers,et al.  Virtual screening of biogenic amine-binding G-protein coupled receptors: comparative evaluation of protein- and ligand-based virtual screening protocols. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[72]  G. Klebe,et al.  Successful virtual screening for a submicromolar antagonist of the neurokinin-1 receptor based on a ligand-supported homology model. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[73]  G. Klebe,et al.  Approaches to the Description and Prediction of the Binding Affinity of Small-Molecule Ligands to Macromolecular Receptors , 2002 .

[74]  Karolina Nilsson,et al.  Phenyl ureas of creatinine as mGluR5 antagonists. A structure-activity relationship study of fenobam analogues. , 2006, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[75]  Fabian Mörchen,et al.  Maximum Common Binding Modes (MCBM): Consensus Docking Scoring Using Multiple Ligand Information and Interaction Fingerprints , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[76]  J. Ballesteros,et al.  Structural mimicry in G protein-coupled receptors: implications of the high-resolution structure of rhodopsin for structure-function analysis of rhodopsin-like receptors. , 2001, Molecular pharmacology.

[77]  G. Schneider,et al.  Virtual Screening for Selective Allosteric mGluR1 Antagonists and Structure–Activity Relationship Investigations for Coumarine Derivatives , 2007, ChemMedChem.

[78]  D C Teller,et al.  Advances in determination of a high-resolution three-dimensional structure of rhodopsin, a model of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). , 2001, Biochemistry.

[79]  G. Klebe,et al.  Ligand-supported homology modelling of protein binding-sites using knowledge-based potentials. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[80]  I. Gantz,et al.  Molecular Basis for the Interaction of [Nle4,d-Phe7]Melanocyte Stimulating Hormone with the Human Melanocortin-1 Receptor (Melanocyte α-MSH Receptor)* , 1997, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[81]  Robert P Sheridan,et al.  Chemical similarity searches: when is complexity justified? , 2007, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[82]  T. Klabunde,et al.  Identification of nonpeptidic urotensin II receptor antagonists by virtual screening based on a pharmacophore model derived from structure-activity relationships and nuclear magnetic resonance studies on urotensin II. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[83]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Information decay in molecular docking screens against holo, apo, and modeled conformations of enzymes. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[84]  T. Kamenecka,et al.  Dipyridyl amides: potent metabotropic glutamate subtype 5 (mGlu5) receptor antagonists. , 2005, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[85]  G. Schneider,et al.  New Allosteric Modulators of Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 5 (mGluR5) Found by Ligand‐Based Virtual Screening , 2005, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[86]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[87]  P. Hajduk,et al.  Evaluation of PMF scoring in docking weak ligands to the FK506 binding protein. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[88]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[89]  S. Betz,et al.  Overlapping, nonidentical binding sites of different classes of nonpeptide antagonists for the human gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[90]  D R Flower,et al.  Lead generation using pharmacophore mapping and three-dimensional database searching: application to muscarinic M(3) receptor antagonists. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[91]  John M. Barnard,et al.  Chemical Similarity Searching , 1998, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[92]  Dehua Huang,et al.  2-(2-[3-(pyridin-3-yloxy)phenyl]-2H-tetrazol-5-yl) pyridine: a highly potent, orally active, metabotropic glutamate subtype 5 (mGlu5) receptor antagonist. , 2004, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[93]  B. Muñoz,et al.  Discovery of novel modulators of metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype-5. , 2004, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.