Comparison and Druggability Prediction of Protein-Ligand Binding Sites from Pharmacophore-Annotated Cavity Shapes

Estimating the pairwise similarity of protein-ligand binding sites is a fast and efficient way of predicting cross-reactivity and putative side effects of drug candidates. Among the many tools available, three-dimensional (3D) alignment-dependent methods are usually slow and based on simplified representations of binding site atoms or surfaces. On the other hand, fast and efficient alignment-free methods have recently been described but suffer from a lack of interpretability. We herewith present a novel binding site description (VolSite), coupled to an alignment and comparison tool (Shaper) combining the speed of alignment-free methods with the interpretability of alignment-dependent approaches. It is based on the comparison of negative images of binding cavities encoding both shape and pharmacophoric properties at regularly spaced grid points. Shaper approximates the resulting molecular shape with a smooth Gaussian function and aligns protein binding sites by optimizing their volume overlap. Volsite and Shaper were successfully applied to compare protein-ligand binding sites and to predict their structural druggability.

[1]  G. Montelione,et al.  Advances in protein NMR provided by the NIGMS Protein Structure Initiative: impact on drug discovery. , 2010, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[2]  Aashish Manglik,et al.  Structure of the δ-opioid receptor bound to naltrindole , 2012, Nature.

[3]  Andrzej Joachimiak,et al.  High-throughput crystallography for structural genomics. , 2009, Current opinion in structural biology.

[4]  P. Hajduk,et al.  Druggability indices for protein targets derived from NMR-based screening data. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[5]  Kalidas Yeturu,et al.  PocketMatch: A new algorithm to compare binding sites in protein structures , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[6]  Lei Xie,et al.  Structure-based systems biology for analyzing off-target binding. , 2011, Current opinion in structural biology.

[7]  Sourav Das,et al.  Rapid Comparison of Protein Binding Site Surfaces with Property Encoded Shape Distributions , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  Didier Rognan,et al.  sc-PDB: a database for identifying variations and multiplicity of 'druggable' binding sites in proteins , 2011, Bioinform..

[9]  Lisa J. Mullan,et al.  Short EMBOSS User Guide , 2002, Briefings Bioinform..

[10]  Jonathan S. Mason,et al.  Progress in Structure Based Drug Design for G Protein-Coupled Receptors , 2011, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[11]  J. Andrew Grant,et al.  Molecular shape and electrostatics in the encoding of relevant chemical information , 2005, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

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

[13]  Daniel Kuhn,et al.  Combining Global and Local Measures for Structure-Based Druggability Predictions , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[14]  Jian Wang,et al.  In Silico Elucidation of the Molecular Mechanism Defining the Adverse Effect of Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[15]  Stefan Schmitt,et al.  DrugPred: A Structure-Based Approach To Predict Protein Druggability Developed Using an Extensive Nonredundant Data Set , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[16]  Robert P. Sheridan,et al.  Drug-like Density: A Method of Quantifying the "Bindability" of a Protein Target Based on a Very Large Set of Pockets and Drug-like Ligands from the Protein Data Bank , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[17]  K. Palczewski,et al.  Crystal Structure of Rhodopsin: A G‐Protein‐Coupled Receptor , 2002, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[18]  Rutger H A Folmer,et al.  Fragment screening to predict druggability (ligandability) and lead discovery success. , 2011, Drug discovery today.

[19]  X. Barril,et al.  Understanding and predicting druggability. A high-throughput method for detection of drug binding sites. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[20]  L. Pardo,et al.  Crystal structure of the μ-opioid receptor bound to a morphinan antagonist , 2012, Nature.

[21]  Jie Wu,et al.  BSSF: a fingerprint based ultrafast binding site similarity search and function analysis server , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[22]  Shuangye Yin,et al.  Fast screening of protein surfaces using geometric invariant fingerprints , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[24]  J. A. Grant,et al.  A fast method of molecular shape comparison: A simple application of a Gaussian description of molecular shape , 1996, J. Comput. Chem..

[25]  P E Bourne,et al.  Protein structure alignment by incremental combinatorial extension (CE) of the optimal path. , 1998, Protein engineering.

[26]  J. A. Grant,et al.  A Gaussian Description of Molecular Shape , 1995 .

[27]  Burkhard Rost,et al.  Structural genomics is the largest contributor of novel structural leverage , 2009, Journal of Structural and Functional Genomics.

[28]  Thomas A. Halgren,et al.  Identifying and Characterizing Binding Sites and Assessing Druggability , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[29]  Philip E. Bourne,et al.  Drug Discovery Using Chemical Systems Biology: Repositioning the Safe Medicine Comtan to Treat Multi-Drug and Extensively Drug Resistant Tuberculosis , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[30]  Stéphanie Pérot,et al.  Druggable pockets and binding site centric chemical space: a paradigm shift in drug discovery. , 2010, Drug discovery today.

[31]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Correction: Binding of Protein Kinase Inhibitors to Synapsin I Inferred from Pair-Wise Binding Site Similarity Measurements , 2010, PLoS ONE.

[32]  J. Pin,et al.  Virtual screening workflow development guided by the "receiver operating characteristic" curve approach. Application to high-throughput docking on metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 4. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  Vincent Le Guilloux,et al.  Fpocket: An open source platform for ligand pocket detection , 2009, BMC Bioinformatics.

[34]  Lisa J. Mullan,et al.  Short EMBOSS User Guide. European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite. , 2002, Briefings in bioinformatics.

[35]  D. Rognan.  Chemogenomic approaches to rational drug design , 2007, British journal of pharmacology.

[36]  J. Thornton,et al.  Shape variation in protein binding pockets and their ligands. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[37]  G. Schneider,et al.  Model structure of APOBEC3C reveals a binding pocket modulating ribonucleic acid interaction required for encapsidation , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[38]  David A. Lee,et al.  PSI-2: structural genomics to cover protein domain family space. , 2009, Structure.

[39]  Jeffrey W. Smith,et al.  CutDB: a proteolytic event database , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[40]  Dmitri I. Svergun,et al.  Small-angle X-ray and neutron scattering as a tool for structural systems biology , 2010, Biological chemistry.

[41]  E. Kellenberger,et al.  A simple and fuzzy method to align and compare druggable ligand‐binding sites , 2008, Proteins.

[42]  Nathanael Weill,et al.  Alignment-Free Ultra-High-Throughput Comparison of Druggable Protein-Ligand Binding Sites , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[43]  Didier Rognan,et al.  How to Measure the Similarity Between Protein Ligand-Binding Sites? , 2008 .

[44]  B. Rost.  Twilight zone of protein sequence alignments. , 1999, Protein engineering.

[45]  B. Honig,et al.  On the nature of cavities on protein surfaces: Application to the identification of drug‐binding sites , 2006, Proteins.

[46]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Structure‐Based Approaches to Target Fishing and Ligand Profiling , 2010, Molecular informatics.

[47]  Daniel R. Caffrey,et al.  Structure-based maximal affinity model predicts small-molecule druggability , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[48]  David C. Jones,et al.  CATH--a hierarchic classification of protein domain structures. , 1997, Structure.