SPOT‐ligand 2: improving structure‐based virtual screening by binding‐homology search on an expanded structural template library

Motivation: The high cost of drug discovery motivates the development of accurate virtual screening tools. Binding‐homology, which takes advantage of known protein‐ligand binding pairs, has emerged as a powerful discrimination technique. In order to exploit all available binding data, modelled structures of ligand‐binding sequences may be used to create an expanded structural binding template library. Results: SPOT‐Ligand 2 has demonstrated significantly improved screening performance over its previous version by expanding the template library 15 times over the previous one. It also performed better than or similar to other binding‐homology approaches on the DUD and DUD‐E benchmarks. Availability and Implementation: The server is available online at http://sparks‐lab.org. Contacts: yaoqi.zhou@griffith.edu.au or yuedong.yang@griffith.edu.au Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

[1]  Yaoqi Zhou,et al.  SPOT‐Ligand: Fast and effective structure‐based virtual screening by binding homology search according to ligand and receptor similarity , 2016, J. Comput. Chem..

[2]  Chris Morley,et al.  Open Babel: An open chemical toolbox , 2011, J. Cheminformatics.

[3]  Yaoqi Zhou,et al.  A new size‐independent score for pairwise protein structure alignment and its application to structure classification and nucleic‐acid binding prediction , 2012, Proteins.

[4]  Jeffrey Skolnick,et al.  PoLi: A Virtual Screening Pipeline Based on Template Pocket and Ligand Similarity , 2015, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[5]  Yaoqi Zhou,et al.  Improving protein fold recognition and template-based modeling by employing probabilistic-based matching between predicted one-dimensional structural properties of query and corresponding native properties of templates , 2011, Bioinform..

[6]  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..

[7]  David S. Wishart,et al.  DrugBank: a comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[8]  Yang Zhang,et al.  BioLiP: a semi-manually curated database for biologically relevant ligand–protein interactions , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[9]  J. Irwin,et al.  Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[10]  Adam Godzik,et al.  Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences , 2006, Bioinform..

[11]  J. Skolnick,et al.  A threading-based method (FINDSITE) for ligand-binding site prediction and functional annotation , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[13]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  FINDSITEcomb: A Threading/Structure-Based, Proteomic-Scale Virtual Ligand Screening Approach , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[14]  Xian Liu,et al.  In Silico target fishing: addressing a “Big Data” problem by ligand-based similarity rankings with data fusion , 2014, Journal of Cheminformatics.

[15]  George Papadatos,et al.  The ChEMBL bioactivity database: an update , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[16]  Michael M. Mysinger,et al.  Directory of Useful Decoys, Enhanced (DUD-E): Better Ligands and Decoys for Better Benchmarking , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[17]  Ryan G. Coleman,et al.  ZINC: A Free Tool to Discover Chemistry for Biology , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..