Challenges, Applications, and Recent Advances of Protein-Ligand Docking in Structure-Based Drug Design

The docking methods used in structure-based virtual database screening offer the ability to quickly and cheaply estimate the affinity and binding mode of a ligand for the protein receptor of interest, such as a drug target. These methods can be used to enrich a database of compounds, so that more compounds that are subsequently experimentally tested are found to be pharmaceutically interesting. In addition, like all virtual screening methods used for drug design, structure-based virtual screening can focus on curated libraries of synthesizable compounds, helping to reduce the expense of subsequent experimental verification. In this review, we introduce the protein-ligand docking methods used for structure-based drug design and other biological applications. We discuss the fundamental challenges facing these methods and some of the current methodological topics of interest. We also discuss the main approaches for applying protein-ligand docking methods. We end with a discussion of the challenging aspects of evaluating or benchmarking the accuracy of docking methods for their improvement, and discuss future directions.

[1]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Electrostatics of ligand binding: parametrization of the generalized Born model and comparison with the Poisson-Boltzmann approach. , 2006, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[2]  Janet E. Jones On the determination of molecular fields. —II. From the equation of state of a gas , 1924 .

[3]  Bruce Tidor,et al.  Systematic placement of structural water molecules for improved scoring of protein-ligand interactions. , 2011, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

[4]  Gregory D. Hawkins,et al.  Pairwise solute descreening of solute charges from a dielectric medium , 1995 .

[5]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Conformational analysis of flexible ligands in macromolecular receptor sites , 1992 .

[6]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Structure-derived potentials and protein simulations. , 1996, Current opinion in structural biology.

[7]  Richard D. Smith,et al.  CSAR Data Set Release 2012: Ligands, Affinities, Complexes, and Docking Decoys , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  An iterative knowledge‐based scoring function for protein–protein recognition , 2008, Proteins.

[9]  William N. Setzer,et al.  In-silico Leishmania Target Selectivity of Antiparasitic Terpenoids , 2013, Molecules.

[10]  Robert Kiss,et al.  http://Mcule.com: a public web service for drug discovery , 2012, Journal of Cheminformatics.

[11]  Brian K Shoichet,et al.  Prediction of protein-ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: successes and gaps. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[12]  Adrià Cereto-Massagué,et al.  The good, the bad and the dubious: VHELIBS, a validation helper for ligands and binding sites , 2013, Journal of Cheminformatics.

[13]  Ashutosh Kumar,et al.  Computational fragment-based screening using RosettaLigand: the SAMPL3 challenge , 2012, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[14]  Csaba Hetényi,et al.  Toward prediction of functional protein pockets using blind docking and pocket search algorithms , 2011, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  J Skolnick,et al.  How do potentials derived from structural databases relate to “true” potentials? , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[16]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Structure-Based Molecular Design , 1994 .

[17]  Xiaomin Luo,et al.  PDTD: a web-accessible protein database for drug target identification , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[18]  Amedeo Caflisch,et al.  Docking small ligands in flexible binding sites , 1998, J. Comput. Chem..

[19]  Eric J. Deeds,et al.  Structural Properties of Non-Traditional Drug Targets Present New Challenges for Virtual Screening , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[20]  Flemming Steen Jørgensen,et al.  In silico predictions of hERG channel blockers in drug discovery: from ligand-based and target-based approaches to systems chemical biology. , 2011, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[21]  David Baker,et al.  Protein-protein docking with backbone flexibility. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  Christian N. S. Pedersen,et al.  Molecular Docking with Ligand Attached Water Molecules , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

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

[24]  Jie Liang,et al.  Chapter 4: Knowledge-based energy functions for computational studies of proteins , 2006, q-bio/0601026.

[25]  Tomasz Grycuk,et al.  Deficiency of the Coulomb-field approximation in the generalized Born model: An improved formula for Born radii evaluation , 2003 .

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

[27]  M. Sippl Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mean force. An approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[28]  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..

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

[30]  Jerzy Leszczynski,et al.  Receptor- and ligand-based study of fullerene analogues: comprehensive computational approach including quantum-chemical, QSAR and molecular docking simulations. , 2013, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

[31]  Harianto Tjong,et al.  GBr(6): a parameterization-free, accurate, analytical generalized born method. , 2007, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[32]  Hans-Joachim Böhm,et al.  Prediction of binding constants of protein ligands: A fast method for the prioritization of hits obtained from de novo design or 3D database search programs , 1998, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

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

[34]  Pradeep Das,et al.  Computational Elucidation of Structural Basis for Ligand Binding with Leishmania donovani Adenosine Kinase , 2013, BioMed research international.

[35]  ANATOLY M. RUVINSKY Role of binding entropy in the refinement of protein–ligand docking predictions: Analysis based on the use of 11 scoring functions , 2007, J. Comput. Chem..

[36]  António J. M. Ribeiro,et al.  Protein-ligand docking in the new millennium--a retrospective of 10 years in the field. , 2013, Current medicinal chemistry.

[37]  Todd J. A. Ewing,et al.  DOCK 4.0: Search strategies for automated molecular docking of flexible molecule databases , 2001, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[38]  P A Kollman,et al.  Continuum solvent studies of the stability of RNA hairpin loops and helices. , 1998, Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics.

[39]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Scoring functions and their evaluation methods for protein-ligand docking: recent advances and future directions. , 2010, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[40]  N. Paul,et al.  Recovering the true targets of specific ligands by virtual screening of the protein data bank , 2004, Proteins.

[41]  B. Honig,et al.  On the calculation of electrostatic interactions in proteins. , 1985, Journal of molecular biology.

[42]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  ZINC - A Free Database of Commercially Available Compounds for Virtual Screening , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[43]  Peter A. Kollman,et al.  FREE ENERGY CALCULATIONS : APPLICATIONS TO CHEMICAL AND BIOCHEMICAL PHENOMENA , 1993 .

[44]  P. Munson,et al.  Statistical significance of hierarchical multi‐body potentials based on Delaunay tessellation and their application in sequence‐structure alignment , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[45]  Xiao He,et al.  Improving the Scoring of Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity by Including the Effects of Structural Water and Electronic Polarization , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[46]  Jens Meiler,et al.  Using RosettaLigand for Small Molecule Docking into Comparative Models , 2012, PloS one.

[47]  F. Jørgensen,et al.  A new concept for multidimensional selection of ligand conformations (MultiSelect) and multidimensional scoring (MultiScore) of protein-ligand binding affinities. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[48]  H. Scheraga,et al.  Model of protein folding: incorporation of a one-dimensional short-range (Ising) model into a three-dimensional model. , 1977, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[49]  Luhua Lai,et al.  Further development and validation of empirical scoring functions for structure-based binding affinity prediction , 2002, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[50]  Enrico O. Purisima,et al.  Protein-ligand binding free energies from exhaustive docking. , 2012, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[51]  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..

[52]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  A Bayesian statistical approach of improving knowledge‐based scoring functions for protein–ligand interactions , 2014, J. Comput. Chem..

[53]  Dima Kozakov,et al.  Sampling and scoring: A marriage made in heaven , 2013, Proteins.

[54]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Using shape complementarity as an initial screen in designing ligands for a receptor binding site of known three-dimensional structure. , 1988, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[55]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Estimation of effective interresidue contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation , 1985 .

[56]  P. Kollman,et al.  Use of MM-PBSA in reproducing the binding free energies to HIV-1 RT of TIBO derivatives and predicting the binding mode to HIV-1 RT of efavirenz by docking and MM-PBSA. , 2001, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[57]  D. van der Spoel,et al.  Blind docking of drug‐sized compounds to proteins with up to a thousand residues , 2006, FEBS letters.

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

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

[60]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Inclusion of Solvation in Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculations Using the Generalized-Born Model , 1999 .

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

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

[63]  I. Khanna,et al.  Drug discovery in pharmaceutical industry: productivity challenges and trends. , 2012, Drug discovery today.

[64]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  An inverse docking approach for identifying new potential anti-cancer targets. , 2011, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[65]  Eugene I. Shakhnovich,et al.  SMOG : DE NOVO DESIGN METHOD BASED ON SIMPLE, FAST, AND ACCURATE FREE ENERGY ESTIMATES. 2. CASE STUDIES IN MOLECULAR DESIGN , 1997 .

[66]  Samuel L. DeLuca,et al.  Small-molecule ligand docking into comparative models with Rosetta , 2013, Nature Protocols.

[67]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Distance‐scaled, finite ideal‐gas reference state improves structure‐derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[69]  William J. Allen,et al.  Implementation of the Hungarian Algorithm to Account for Ligand Symmetry and Similarity in Structure-Based Design , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[70]  Federico Corelli,et al.  Hsp90 Inhibitors, Part 2: Combining Ligand-Based and Structure-Based Approaches for Virtual Screening Application , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[71]  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.

[72]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  An iterative knowledge‐based scoring function to predict protein–ligand interactions: II. Validation of the scoring function , 2006, J. Comput. Chem..

[73]  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.

[74]  Junhai Xiao,et al.  Novel Substituted Heteroaromatic Piperazine and Piperidine Derivatives as Inhibitors of Human Enterovirus 71 and Coxsackievirus A16 , 2013, Molecules.

[75]  R. Zhou Free energy landscape of protein folding in water: Explicit vs. implicit solvent , 2003, Proteins.

[76]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Construction and Test of Ligand Decoy Sets Using MDock: Community Structure-Activity Resource Benchmarks for Binding Mode Prediction , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[77]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Recognizing Pitfalls in Virtual Screening: A Critical Review , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[78]  David W. Ritchie,et al.  Using Consensus-Shape Clustering To Identify Promiscuous Ligands and Protein Targets and To Choose the Right Query for Shape-Based Virtual Screening , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[79]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function , 1998, J. Comput. Chem..

[80]  Y. Martin,et al.  A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[81]  Richard A. Lewis,et al.  Lessons in molecular recognition: the effects of ligand and protein flexibility on molecular docking accuracy. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[82]  D. Spellmeyer,et al.  Textbook of Drug Design and Discovery , 2003 .

[83]  Gregory L. Wilson,et al.  Integrating structure-based and ligand-based approaches for computational drug design. , 2011, Future medicinal chemistry.

[84]  Song Liu,et al.  A knowledge-based energy function for protein-ligand, protein-protein, and protein-DNA complexes. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[85]  Antonia Caroli,et al.  Hsp90 Inhibitors, Part 1: Definition of 3-D QSAutogrid/R Models as a Tool for Virtual Screening , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[86]  Nathan A. Baker,et al.  Electrostatics of nanosystems: Application to microtubules and the ribosome , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[87]  A. Anderson The process of structure-based drug design. , 2003, Chemistry & biology.

[88]  R. Wade,et al.  Prediction of drug binding affinities by comparative binding energy analysis. , 1997, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[89]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Multiscale generalized born modeling of ligand binding energies for virtual database screening. , 2009, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[90]  T. Blundell,et al.  Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[91]  Renxiao Wang,et al.  The PDBbind database: collection of binding affinities for protein-ligand complexes with known three-dimensional structures. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[92]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Efficient molecular docking of NMR structures: Application to HIV‐1 protease , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[93]  Trilce Estrada,et al.  Evaluation of Several Two-Step Scoring Functions Based on Linear Interaction Energy, Effective Ligand Size, and Empirical Pair Potentials for Prediction of Protein-Ligand Binding Geometry and Free Energy , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[94]  Sinosh Skariyachan,et al.  Exploring insights for virulent gene inhibition of multidrug resistant Salmonella typhi, Vibrio cholerae, and Staphylococcus areus by potential phytoligands via in silico screening , 2014, Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics.

[95]  K. Dill,et al.  An iterative method for extracting energy-like quantities from protein structures. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[96]  Sinosh Skariyachan,et al.  In silico exploration of novel phytoligands against probable drug target of Clostridium tetani , 2012, Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences.

[97]  J. Andrew Grant,et al.  A smooth permittivity function for Poisson–Boltzmann solvation methods , 2001, J. Comput. Chem..

[98]  Michael K. Gilson,et al.  ''Mining minima'': Direct computation of conformational free energy , 1997 .

[99]  D. Case,et al.  Generalized born models of macromolecular solvation effects. , 2000, Annual review of physical chemistry.

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

[101]  Stefano Alcaro,et al.  Identification and characterization of new DNA G-quadruplex binders selected by a combination of ligand and structure-based virtual screening approaches. , 2013, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

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

[104]  John P. Overington,et al.  How many drug targets are there? , 2006, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[105]  Stephen R. Comeau,et al.  PIPER: An FFT‐based protein docking program with pairwise potentials , 2006, Proteins.

[106]  M. Murcko,et al.  Consensus scoring: A method for obtaining improved hit rates from docking databases of three-dimensional structures into proteins. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[107]  K. Dill,et al.  Statistical potentials extracted from protein structures: how accurate are they? , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[108]  Charles L. Brooks,et al.  Performance comparison of generalized born and Poisson methods in the calculation of electrostatic solvation energies for protein structures , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[109]  Hans-Joachim Böhm,et al.  The computer program LUDI: A new method for the de novo design of enzyme inhibitors , 1992, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[110]  Anthony Nicholls,et al.  Conformer Generation with OMEGA: Learning from the Data Set and the Analysis of Failures , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

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

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

[113]  Shuxing Zhang,et al.  Polypharmacology: drug discovery for the future , 2013, Expert review of clinical pharmacology.

[114]  Oleg A. Prokopyev,et al.  Optimization of minimum set of protein–DNA interactions: a quasi exact solution with minimum over-fitting , 2009, Bioinform..

[115]  SHENG-YOU HUANG,et al.  An iterative knowledge‐based scoring function to predict protein–ligand interactions: I. Derivation of interaction potentials , 2006, J. Comput. Chem..

[116]  Corwin Hansch,et al.  The physicochemical approach to drug design and discovery (QSAR) , 1981 .

[117]  Yvonne C. Martin,et al.  The Information Content of 2D and 3D Structural Descriptors Relevant to Ligand-Receptor Binding , 1997, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[118]  G. Klebe,et al.  Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[119]  M. Parrinello,et al.  Sampling protein motion and solvent effect during ligand binding , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[120]  M. Sippl,et al.  Helmholtz free energies of atom pair interactions in proteins. , 1996, Folding & design.

[121]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Pairwise GB/SA Scoring Function for Structure-based Drug Design , 2004 .

[122]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Chapter 14 - Mean-Force Scoring Functions for Protein–Ligand Binding , 2010 .

[123]  Ashini Bolia,et al.  BP-Dock: A Flexible Docking Scheme for Exploring Protein-Ligand Interactions Based on Unbound Structures , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[124]  Niu Huang,et al.  Identifying multiple-target ligands via computational chemogenomics approaches. , 2012, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[125]  Andrzej Kloczkowski,et al.  Combining statistical potentials with dynamics-based entropies improves selection from protein decoys and docking poses. , 2012, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

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

[127]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Four-dimensional docking: a fast and accurate account of discrete receptor flexibility in ligand docking. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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

[129]  Emil Alexov,et al.  Rapid grid‐based construction of the molecular surface and the use of induced surface charge to calculate reaction field energies: Applications to the molecular systems and geometric objects , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[130]  Riccardo Chelli,et al.  Toward quantitative estimates of binding affinities for protein–ligand systems involving large inhibitor compounds: A steered molecular dynamics simulation route , 2013, J. Comput. Chem..

[131]  Y.Z. Chen,et al.  Ligand–protein inverse docking and its potential use in the computer search of protein targets of a small molecule , 2001, Proteins.

[132]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Virtual screening and fast automated docking methods. , 2002, Drug discovery today.

[133]  Philip C. Biggin,et al.  Quantifying Water-Mediated Protein–Ligand Interactions in a Glutamate Receptor: A DFT Study , 2011, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[134]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Inclusion of Solvation and Entropy in the Knowledge-Based Scoring Function for Protein-Ligand Interactions , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[135]  Matthias Keil,et al.  Are predefined decoy sets of ligand poses able to quantify scoring function accuracy? , 2012, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[136]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. , 1998, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[137]  Anthony Nicholls,et al.  SAMPL2 challenge: prediction of solvation energies and tautomer ratios , 2010, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[138]  Narasimha Sharma,et al.  Structure based virtual screening of novel inhibitors against multidrug resistant superbugs , 2012, Bioinformation.

[139]  Equal contributors , 2022 .

[140]  Renxiao Wang,et al.  Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[141]  P Willett,et al.  Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[142]  Richard D. Smith,et al.  CSAR Benchmark Exercise of 2010: Selection of the Protein–Ligand Complexes , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[143]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  Advances and Challenges in Protein-Ligand Docking , 2010, International journal of molecular sciences.

[144]  Benjamin A. Ellingson,et al.  Conformer Generation with OMEGA: Algorithm and Validation Using High Quality Structures from the Protein Databank and Cambridge Structural Database , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[145]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Hierarchical docking of databases of multiple ligand conformations. , 2005, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[146]  G. Klebe,et al.  DrugScore(CSD)-knowledge-based scoring function derived from small molecule crystal data with superior recognition rate of near-native ligand poses and better affinity prediction. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[147]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  CHARMM general force field: A force field for drug‐like molecules compatible with the CHARMM all‐atom additive biological force fields , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[148]  Sinosh Skariyachan,et al.  Homology modelling of CB1 receptor and selection of potential inhibitor against Obesity , 2012, Bioinformation.

[149]  Jens Meiler,et al.  Rosetta Ligand docking with flexible XML protocols. , 2012, Methods in molecular biology.

[150]  W. C. Still,et al.  Semianalytical treatment of solvation for molecular mechanics and dynamics , 1990 .

[151]  A. Merlino,et al.  Homology modeling of T. cruzi and L. major NADH-dependent fumarate reductases: ligand docking, molecular dynamics validation, and insights on their binding modes. , 2014, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[152]  V. Hornak,et al.  Comparison of multiple Amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters , 2006, Proteins.

[153]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Preparation and refinement of model protein-ligand complexes. , 2012, Methods in molecular biology.

[154]  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..

[155]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  A knowledge-based scoring function for protein-RNA interactions derived from a statistical mechanics-based iterative method , 2014, Nucleic acids research.

[156]  Ron Elber,et al.  Energy design for protein-protein interactions. , 2011, The Journal of chemical physics.

[157]  T Lengauer,et al.  The particle concept: placing discrete water molecules during protein‐ligand docking predictions , 1999, Proteins.

[158]  Chengfei Yan,et al.  Automated Large-Scale File Preparation, Docking, and Scoring: Evaluation of ITScore and STScore Using the 2012 Community Structure-Activity Resource Benchmark , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[159]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Molecular docking using shape descriptors , 1992 .

[160]  H. John Smith,et al.  Textbook of Drug Design and Discovery , 2002 .

[161]  Yogesh T Jasrai,et al.  Compound prioritization from inverse docking experiment using receptor‐centric and ligand‐centric methods: a case study on Plasmodium falciparum Fab enzymes , 2014, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[162]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Automated docking with grid‐based energy evaluation , 1992 .

[163]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  FINDSITEcomb: A Threading/Structure-Based, Proteomic-Scale Virtual Ligand Screening Approach , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..