Integrating sampling techniques and inverse virtual screening: toward the discovery of artificial peptide-based receptors for ligands

A novel heuristic using an iterative select-and-purge strategy is proposed. It combines statistical techniques for sampling and classification by rigid molecular docking through an inverse virtual screening scheme. This approach aims to the de novo discovery of short peptides that may act as docking receptors for small target molecules when there are no data available about known association complexes between them. The algorithm performs an unbiased stochastic exploration of the sample space, acting as a binary classifier when analyzing the entire peptides population. It uses a novel and effective criterion for weighting the likelihood of a given peptide to form an association complex with a particular ligand molecule based on amino acid sequences. The exploratory analysis relies on chemical information of peptides composition, sequence patterns, and association free energies (docking scores) in order to converge to those peptides forming the association complexes with higher affinities. Statistical estimations support these results providing an association probability by improving predictions accuracy even in cases where only a fraction of all possible combinations are sampled. False positives/false negatives ratio was also improved with this method. A simple rigid-body docking approach together with the proper information about amino acid sequences was used. The methodology was applied in a retrospective docking study to all 8000 possible tripeptide combinations using the 20 natural amino acids, screened against a training set of 77 different ligands with diverse functional groups. Afterward, all tripeptides were screened against a test set of 82 ligands, also containing different functional groups. Results show that our integrated methodology is capable of finding a representative group of the top-scoring tripeptides. The associated probability of identifying the best receptor or a group of the top-ranked receptors is more than double and about 10 times higher, respectively, when compared to classical random sampling methods.

[1]  Yanli Wang,et al.  Structure-Based Virtual Screening for Drug Discovery: a Problem-Centric Review , 2012, The AAPS Journal.

[2]  Carolina H Andrade,et al.  Assessing the performance of 3D pharmacophore models in virtual screening: how good are they? , 2013, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[3]  Fu Wei,et al.  Evaluation of various inverse docking schemes in multiple targets identification. , 2010, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[4]  Mark McGann,et al.  FRED Pose Prediction and Virtual Screening Accuracy , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[5]  G. Bifulco,et al.  Inverse Virtual Screening allows the discovery of the biological activity of natural compounds. , 2012, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[6]  Jung-Hsin Lin,et al.  idTarget: a web server for identifying protein targets of small chemical molecules with robust scoring functions and a divide-and-conquer docking approach , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[7]  S. Gharaghani,et al.  A Structure‐based QSAR and Docking Study on Imidazo[1,5‐a][1,2,4]‐triazolo[1,5‐d][1,4,]benzodiazepines as Selective GABAAα5 Inverse Agonists , 2011, Chemical biology & drug design.

[8]  V. Vyas,et al.  Pharmacophore modeling, virtual screening, docking and in silico ADMET analysis of protein kinase B (PKB β) inhibitors. , 2013, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[9]  Z. Altintas,et al.  Computational Design of Peptide Ligands for Ochratoxin A , 2013, Toxins.

[10]  Chang-Guo Zhan,et al.  Novel human mPGES-1 inhibitors identified through structure-based virtual screening. , 2011, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[11]  Yonghua Wang,et al.  Structural determinants of benzodiazepinedione/peptide-based p53-HDM2 inhibitors using 3D-QSAR, docking and molecular dynamics , 2011, Journal of Molecular Modeling.

[12]  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..

[13]  Peter A. Lieberzeit,et al.  Biomimetic Strategies for Sensing Biological Species , 2013, Biosensors.

[14]  Chang-Guo Zhan,et al.  New inhibitor of 3-phosphoinositide dependent protein kinase-1 identified from virtual screening. , 2012, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[15]  M. Carlo,et al.  Peptides Trapping Dioxins: A Docking-Based Inverse Screening Approach , 2013 .

[16]  Xinping Luo,et al.  Docking-based virtual screening of potential human P2Y12 receptor antagonists. , 2011, Acta biochimica et biophysica Sinica.

[17]  B. Dong,et al.  Docking and molecular dynamics study on the inhibitory activity of N, N-disubstituted-trifluoro-3-amino-2-propanols-based inhibitors of cholesteryl ester transfer protein , 2011, Journal of molecular modeling.

[18]  Marcello Mascini,et al.  Peptides trapping cocaine: docking simulation and experimental screening by solid phase extraction followed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry in plasma samples. , 2013, Analytica chimica acta.

[19]  Jie Liang,et al.  Structure-based shape pharmacophore modeling for the discovery of novel anesthetic compounds. , 2009, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[20]  Elizabeth Yuriev,et al.  Latest developments in molecular docking: 2010–2011 in review , 2013, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[21]  B. Padhy,et al.  Drug repositioning: re-investigating existing drugs for new therapeutic indications. , 2011, Journal of postgraduate medicine.

[22]  Sheng-Yong Yang,et al.  Pharmacophore modeling and applications in drug discovery: challenges and recent advances. , 2010, Drug discovery today.

[23]  J. Bajorath,et al.  State-of-the-art in ligand-based virtual screening. , 2011, Drug discovery today.

[24]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Optimization of High Throughput Virtual Screening by Combining Shape‐Matching and Docking Methods. , 2008 .

[25]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions , 2002, Proteins.

[26]  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.

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

[28]  David S. Wishart,et al.  Development of a Novel Virtual Screening Cascade Protocol to Identify Potential Trypanothione Reductase Inhibitors , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[29]  Alessandro Pedretti,et al.  VEGA – An open platform to develop chemo-bio-informatics applications, using plug-in architecture and script programming , 2004, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

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

[31]  Alexander A. Kantardjiev Quantum.Ligand.Dock: protein–ligand docking with quantum entanglement refinement on a GPU system , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[32]  Fumio Hirata,et al.  Systematic docking study of the carbohydrate binding module protein of Cel7A with the cellulose Ialpha crystal model. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[33]  Jiwon Choi,et al.  Enrichment of virtual hits by progressive shape-matching and docking. , 2012, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[34]  Xiaomin Luo,et al.  TarFisDock: a web server for identifying drug targets with docking approach , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[35]  Douglas R. Houston,et al.  Consensus Docking: Improving the Reliability of Docking in a Virtual Screening Context , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[36]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[37]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Docking-based virtual screening for ligands of G protein-coupled receptors: not only crystal structures but also in silico models. , 2011, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[38]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Fully Automated Flexible Docking of Ligands into Flexible Synthetic Receptors Using Forward and Inverse Docking Strategies , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[39]  I. Kuntz Structure-Based Strategies for Drug Design and Discovery , 1992, Science.

[40]  A. Nicholls,et al.  Ligand Entropy in Gas-Phase, Upon Solvation and Protein Complexation. Fast Estimation with Quasi-Newton Hessian. , 2010, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[41]  A. Winsor Sampling techniques. , 2000, Nursing times.

[42]  Christopher I. Bayly,et al.  Evaluating Virtual Screening Methods: Good and Bad Metrics for the "Early Recognition" Problem , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[43]  Federico Berti,et al.  Short peptides as biosensor transducers , 2012, Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry.

[44]  I. Chianella,et al.  Computational design and synthesis of molecularly imprinted polymers with high binding capacity for pharmaceutical applications-model case: Adsorbent for abacavir , 2006 .

[45]  P. Lan,et al.  3D-QSAR and Molecular Docking Studies on Fused Pyrazoles as p38α Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Inhibitors , 2010, International journal of molecular sciences.

[46]  Anders Wallqvist,et al.  Exploring Polypharmacology Using a ROCS-Based Target Fishing Approach , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[47]  M. Carlo,et al.  Multiple Minima Hypersurfaces Procedures for Biomimetic Ligands Screening , 2011 .

[48]  Bohdan Waszkowycz,et al.  Towards improving compound selection in structure-based virtual screening. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[49]  Luis Alberto Montero-Cabrera,et al.  Peptides Binding Cocaine: A Strategy to Design Biomimetic Receptors , 2012 .

[50]  Hans-Joachim Böhm,et al.  A guide to drug discovery: Hit and lead generation: beyond high-throughput screening , 2003, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[51]  Edward O. Cannon New Benchmark for Chemical Nomenclature Software , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[52]  Sergey A. Piletsky,et al.  Rational design of a polymer specific for microcystin-LR using a computational approach. , 2002, Analytical chemistry.

[53]  C. Chen,et al.  (2S,4S)-1-[2-(1,1-dimethyl-3-oxo-3-pyrrolidin-1-yl-propylamino)acetyl]-4-fluoro-pyrrolidine-2-carbonitrile: a potent, selective, and orally bioavailable dipeptide-derived inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase IV. , 2010, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[54]  Dibyabhaba Pradhan,et al.  Docking studies towards exploring antiviral compounds against envelope protein of yellow fever virus , 2011, Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences.

[55]  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..

[56]  Ziniu Yu,et al.  Rational questing for potential novel inhibitors of FabK from Streptococcus pneumoniae by combining FMO calculation, CoMFA 3D-QSAR modeling and virtual screening , 2011, Journal of molecular modeling.

[57]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Ligand-based structural hypotheses for virtual screening. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[58]  Eiichi Akaho,et al.  VSDK: Virtual screening of small molecules using AutoDock Vina on Windows platform , 2011, Bioinformation.