Molecular docking programs successfully predict the binding of a β-lactamase inhibitory protein to TEM-1 β-lactamase

Crystallization of the 1:1 molecular complex between the β-lactamase TEM-1 and the β-lactamase inhibitory protein BLIP has provided an opportunity to put a stringent test on current protein-docking algorithms. Prior to the successful determination of the structure of the complex, nine laboratory groups were given the refined atomic coordinates of each of the native molecules. Other than the fact that BLIP is an effective inhibitor of a number of β-lactamase enzymes (KI for TEM-1∼100 pM) no other biochemical or structural data were available to assist the practitioners in their molecular docking. In addition, it was not known whether the molecules underwent conf ormational changes upon association or whether the inhibition was competitive or non-competitive. All six of the groups that accepted the challenge correctly predicted the general mode of association of BLIP and TEM-1.

[1]  J. Janin,et al.  Protein‐protein recognition analyzed by docking simulation , 1991, Proteins.

[2]  A. Olson,et al.  Shape analysis of molecular surfaces , 1993, Biopolymers.

[3]  S. Kim,et al.  "Soft docking": matching of molecular surface cubes. , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  Pedro M. Alzari,et al.  A potent new mode of β-lactamase inhibition revealed by the 1.7 Å X-ray crystallographic structure of the TEM-1–BLIP complex , 1996, Nature Structural Biology.

[5]  B. Honig,et al.  Classical electrostatics in biology and chemistry. , 1995, Science.

[6]  E. Katchalski‐Katzir,et al.  Molecular surface recognition: determination of geometric fit between proteins and their ligands by correlation techniques. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  J. Janin,et al.  Protein docking algorithms: simulating molecular recognition , 1993 .

[8]  Randy J. Read,et al.  Multiple-Start Monte Carlo Docking of Flexible Ligands , 1994 .

[9]  P. Kraulis.  A program to produce both detailed and schematic plots of protein structures , 1991 .

[10]  André Matagne,et al.  Structural and kinetic characterization of a β-lactamase-inhibitor protein , 1994, Nature.

[11]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Protein docking and complementarity. , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  Richard M. Jackson,et al.  Protein surface area defined , 1993, Nature.

[13]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Detailed ab initio prediction of lysozyme–antibody complex with 1.6 Å accuracy , 1994, Nature Structural Biology.

[14]  M J Sternberg,et al.  Application of scaled particle theory to model the hydrophobic effect: implications for molecular association and protein stability. , 1994, Protein engineering.

[15]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  ICM—A new method for protein modeling and design: Applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation , 1994, J. Comput. Chem..

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

[17]  K. Sharp,et al.  Protein folding and association: Insights from the interfacial and thermodynamic properties of hydrocarbons , 1991, Proteins.

[18]  A. Olson,et al.  Approximation and characterization of molecular surfaces , 1993, Biopolymers.

[19]  M J Sternberg,et al.  A continuum model for protein-protein interactions: application to the docking problem. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[20]  C. Betzel,et al.  Molecular structure of the acyl-enzyme intermediate in β-lactam hydrolysis at 1.7 Å resolution , 1992, Nature.