Molecular docking: theoretical background, practical applications and perspectives

Molecular docking is one of the key computational chemistry techniques that are routinely applied to drug discovery. The holy grail of molecular docking is to replace experimental studies of protein-ligand complexes by modeling their structures and binding affinities in silico. However, current practical achievements of docking suggest that approaching experimental accuracy with computations is a big challenge for theoretical chemistry.

[1]  Campbell McInnes,et al.  Virtual screening strategies in drug discovery. , 2007, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[2]  Joannis Apostolakis,et al.  GlamDock: Development and Validation of a New Docking Tool on Several Thousand Protein-Ligand Complexes , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[3]  C. Venkatachalam,et al.  LigandFit: a novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites. , 2003, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[4]  Christopher R. Corbeil,et al.  Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules. 3. Impact of Input Ligand Conformation, Protein Flexibility, and Water Molecules on the Accuracy of Docking Programs , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[5]  Paul N. Mortenson,et al.  Diverse, high-quality test set for the validation of protein-ligand docking performance. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[6]  Kai Zhu,et al.  Improved Methods for Side Chain and Loop Predictions via the Protein Local Optimization Program:  Variable Dielectric Model for Implicitly Improving the Treatment of Polarization Effects. , 2007, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[7]  Gilles Marcou,et al.  Optimizing Fragment and Scaffold Docking by Use of Molecular Interaction Fingerprints , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Ranking Targets in Structure-Based Virtual Screening of Three-Dimensional Protein Libraries: Methods and Problems , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[9]  Christopher R. Corbeil,et al.  Towards the development of universal, fast and highly accurate docking/scoring methods: a long way to go , 2008, British journal of pharmacology.

[10]  Christopher R. Corbeil,et al.  Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules, 1. Development and Validation of FITTED 1.0 , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[11]  Victor Guallar,et al.  Importance of accurate charges in molecular docking: Quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) approach , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

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

[13]  Xin Wen,et al.  BindingDB: a web-accessible database of experimentally determined protein–ligand binding affinities , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[14]  J M Blaney,et al.  A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. , 1982, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  Niu Huang,et al.  Exploiting ordered waters in molecular docking. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[16]  J. Scott Dixon,et al.  Flexible ligand docking using a genetic algorithm , 1995, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[17]  Ajay N. Jain.  Bias, reporting, and sharing: computational evaluations of docking methods , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

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

[19]  G. A. Lazar,et al.  Engineered antibody Fc variants with enhanced effector function. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  R. Friesner,et al.  Novel procedure for modeling ligand/receptor induced fit effects. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[21]  Renxiao Wang,et al.  The PDBbind database: methodologies and updates. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  A semiempirical free energy force field with charge‐based desolvation , 2007, J. Comput. Chem..

[23]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  AffinDB: a freely accessible database of affinities for protein–ligand complexes from the PDB , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[24]  Markus H. J. Seifert,et al.  Robust optimization of scoring functions for a target class , 2009, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[25]  P. Hajduk,et al.  A decade of fragment-based drug design: strategic advances and lessons learned , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

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

[27]  Colin McMartin,et al.  QXP: Powerful, rapid computer algorithms for structure-based drug design , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[28]  René Thomsen,et al.  MolDock: a new technique for high-accuracy molecular docking. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[29]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  SFCscore: Scoring functions for affinity prediction of protein–ligand complexes , 2008, Proteins.

[30]  Sangtae Kim,et al.  Position Specific Interaction Dependent Scoring Technique for Virtual Screening Based on Weighted Protein-Ligand Interaction Fingerprint Profiles , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[31]  S. Teague.  Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery , 2003, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[32]  R Abagyan,et al.  Flexible protein–ligand docking by global energy optimization in internal coordinates , 1997, Proteins.

[33]  Peter Gwynne,et al.  Drug Discovery: 5 , 2002 .

[34]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Customizing scoring functions for docking , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[35]  Matthew P. Repasky,et al.  Extra precision glide: docking and scoring incorporating a model of hydrophobic enclosure for protein-ligand complexes. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[36]  Rob Leurs,et al.  Transforming fragments into candidates: small becomes big in medicinal chemistry. , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[37]  Per Berglund,et al.  Engineered enzymes for improved organic synthesis. , 2003, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[38]  Allen B Richon.  Current status and future direction of the molecular modeling industry. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[39]  Adrian A Canutescu,et al.  Access the most recent version at doi: 10.1110/ps.03154503 References , 2003 .

[40]  Ajay N. Jain.  Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[41]  Aniko Simon,et al.  eHiTS: an innovative approach to the docking and scoring function problems. , 2006, Current protein & peptide science.

[42]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Multiple automatic base selection: Protein–ligand docking based on incremental construction without manual intervention , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[43]  Fedor N. Novikov,et al.  Lead finder: an approach to improve accuracy of protein-ligand docking, binding energy estimation, and virtual screening. , 2008, Journal of chemical information and modeling.

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

[45]  C. Sander,et al.  An effective solvation term based on atomic occupancies for use in protein simulations , 1993 .

[46]  E. Mehler.  Self-Consistent, Free Energy Based Approximation To Calculate pH Dependent Electrostatic Effects in Proteins , 1996 .

[47]  Aniko Simon,et al.  eHiTS: a new fast, exhaustive flexible ligand docking system. , 2007, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[48]  C. E. Peishoff,et al.  A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[49]  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.

[50]  Richard D. Taylor,et al.  Modeling water molecules in protein-ligand docking using GOLD. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

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