Performance of HADDOCK and a simple contact-based protein–ligand binding affinity predictor in the D3R Grand Challenge 2

We present the performance of HADDOCK, our information-driven docking software, in the second edition of the D3R Grand Challenge. In this blind experiment, participants were requested to predict the structures and binding affinities of complexes between the Farnesoid X nuclear receptor and 102 different ligands. The models obtained in Stage1 with HADDOCK and ligand-specific protocol show an average ligand RMSD of 5.1 Å from the crystal structure. Only 6/35 targets were within 2.5 Å RMSD from the reference, which prompted us to investigate the limiting factors and revise our protocol for Stage2. The choice of the receptor conformation appeared to have the strongest influence on the results. Our Stage2 models were of higher quality (13 out of 35 were within 2.5 Å), with an average RMSD of 4.1 Å. The docking protocol was applied to all 102 ligands to generate poses for binding affinity prediction. We developed a modified version of our contact-based binding affinity predictor PRODIGY, using the number of interatomic contacts classified by their type and the intermolecular electrostatic energy. This simple structure-based binding affinity predictor shows a Kendall’s Tau correlation of 0.37 in ranking the ligands (7th best out of 77 methods, 5th/25 groups). Those results were obtained from the average prediction over the top10 poses, irrespective of their similarity/correctness, underscoring the robustness of our simple predictor. This results in an enrichment factor of 2.5 compared to a random predictor for ranking ligands within the top 25%, making it a promising approach to identify lead compounds in virtual screening.

[1]  C. Dominguez,et al.  HADDOCK: a protein-protein docking approach based on biochemical or biophysical information. , 2003, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[2]  Sandor Vajda,et al.  CAPRI: A Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions , 2003, Proteins.

[3]  Søren Neve,et al.  Plectasin, a Fungal Defensin, Targets the Bacterial Cell Wall Precursor Lipid II , 2010, Science.

[4]  W. Delano The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System , 2002 .

[5]  Alexandre M J J Bonvin,et al.  Advances in integrative modeling of biomolecular complexes. , 2013, Methods.

[6]  Alexandre M. J. J. Bonvin,et al.  PRODIGY: a web server for predicting the binding affinity of protein-protein complexes , 2016, Bioinform..

[7]  G C P van Zundert,et al.  Sense and simplicity in HADDOCK scoring: Lessons from CASP‐CAPRI round 1 , 2016, Proteins.

[8]  Anna Vangone,et al.  PRODIGY: A Contact-based Predictor of Binding Affinity in Protein-protein Complexes. , 2017, Bio-protocol.

[9]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines , 2011, TIST.

[10]  G C P van Zundert,et al.  The HADDOCK2.2 Web Server: User-Friendly Integrative Modeling of Biomolecular Complexes. , 2016, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  Z. Weng,et al.  A structure‐based benchmark for protein–protein binding affinity , 2011, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[12]  Wim F Vranken,et al.  ACPYPE - AnteChamber PYthon Parser interfacE , 2012, BMC Research Notes.

[13]  Leonardo L. G. Ferreira,et al.  Molecular Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design Strategies , 2015, Molecules.

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

[15]  A. Bonvin,et al.  The vancomycin-nisin(1-12) hybrid restores activity against vancomycin resistant Enterococci. , 2008, Biochemistry.

[16]  Alexandre M J J Bonvin,et al.  Active-site architecture and catalytic mechanism of the lipid A deacylase LpxR of Salmonella typhimurium , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Anna Vangone,et al.  Contacts-based prediction of binding affinity in protein–protein complexes , 2015, eLife.

[18]  X. Daura,et al.  Peptide Folding: When Simulation Meets Experiment , 1999 .

[19]  Renato Longhi,et al.  NMR‐based modeling and binding studies of a ternary complex between chicken liver bile acid binding protein and bile acids , 2007, Proteins.

[20]  B. Kuhn,et al.  Optimization of a novel class of benzimidazole-based farnesoid X receptor (FXR) agonists to improve physicochemical and ADME properties. , 2011, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[21]  Raphael A. G. Chaleil,et al.  Updates to the Integrated Protein-Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2. , 2015, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  A. D. McLachlan,et al.  Rapid comparison of protein structures , 1982 .

[23]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Principles of flexible protein–protein docking , 2008, Proteins.

[24]  Tao Jiang,et al.  ChemmineR: a compound mining framework for R , 2008, Bioinform..

[25]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Identification of protein-protein interaction sites from docking energy landscapes. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  Alexandre M. J. J. Bonvin,et al.  Predicting and Dissecting High-order Molecular Complexity by Information-driven Biomolecular Docking , 2012 .

[27]  A. W. Schüttelkopf,et al.  PRODRG: a tool for high-throughput crystallography of protein-ligand complexes. , 2004, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[28]  Shawn P. Williams,et al.  FXR agonist activity of conformationally constrained analogs of GW 4064. , 2009, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[29]  William J. Allen,et al.  Practical Considerations for Building GROMOS-Compatible Small-Molecule Topologies , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[30]  Yan Wang,et al.  fmcsR: mismatch tolerant maximum common substructure searching in R , 2013, Bioinform..

[31]  Roberto Pellicciari,et al.  Structural basis for bile acid binding and activation of the nuclear receptor FXR. , 2003, Molecular cell.

[32]  Li Yang,et al.  Bile acid nuclear receptor FXR and digestive system diseases , 2015, Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B.

[33]  Alexandre M. J. J. Bonvin,et al.  HADDOCK2P2I: A Biophysical Model for Predicting the Binding Affinity of Protein–Protein Interaction Inhibitors , 2014, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[34]  Shawn P Williams,et al.  Conformationally constrained farnesoid X receptor (FXR) agonists: heteroaryl replacements of the naphthalene. , 2011, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[35]  Piet Gros,et al.  Crystal structure and catalytic mechanism of the LPS 3-O-deacylase PagL from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  K. Lindor,et al.  Recent advances in the development of farnesoid X receptor agonists. , 2015, Annals of translational medicine.

[37]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[38]  Robin Taylor,et al.  A new test set for validating predictions of protein–ligand interaction , 2002, Proteins.

[39]  Michael K. Gilson,et al.  BindingDB in 2015: A public database for medicinal chemistry, computational chemistry and systems pharmacology , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

[40]  Yanlin Zhu,et al.  A Novel Class of Natural FXR Modulators with a Unique Mode of Selective Co‐regulator Assembly , 2017, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[41]  Pedro Alexandrino Fernandes,et al.  Protein–protein docking dealing with the unknown , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[42]  Shawn P Williams,et al.  Conformationally constrained farnesoid X receptor (FXR) agonists: Naphthoic acid-based analogs of GW 4064. , 2008, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[43]  Michael Feig,et al.  MMTSB Tool Set: enhanced sampling and multiscale modeling methods for applications in structural biology. , 2004, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[44]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  The OPLS [optimized potentials for liquid simulations] potential functions for proteins, energy minimizations for crystals of cyclic peptides and crambin. , 1988, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[45]  Alexandre M J J Bonvin,et al.  Activity-structure correlations in divergent lectin evolution: fine specificity of chicken galectin CG-14 and computational analysis of flexible ligand docking for CG-14 and the closely related CG-16. , 2007, Glycobiology.