Modeling protein-ligand complexes

Current Opinion in Structural Biology

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 236-241

  Bamborough, Paul ^a   Cohen, Fred E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; BINDING SITE; MOLECULAR MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; SHORT SURVEY;

EID: 0029871944     PISSN: 0959440X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-440X(96)80081-9     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Kuntz ID, Meng EC, Shoichet BK: Structure-based molecular design. Accounts Chem Res 1994, 27:117-123.
2. Whittle PJ, Blundell TL: Protein structure-based drug design. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struc 1994, 23:349-375.
3. Lybrand TP: Ligand-protein docking and rational drug design. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1995, 5:224-228.
4. Mattos C, Rasmussen B, Ding X, Petsko GA, Ringe D: Analogous inhibitors of elastase do not always bind analogously. Nature Struct Biol 1994, 1:55-58.
5. Rastelli G, Thomas B, Kollman PA, Santi DV: Insight into the specificity of thymidylate synthase from molecular dynamics and free energy perturbation calculations. J Am Chem Soc 1995, 117:7213-7227.
6. Shen J, Quiocho FA: Calculation of binding energy differences for receptor-ligand systems using the Poisson-Boltzmann method. J Comput Chem 1995, 16:445-448.
7. Zacharias M, Luty BA, Davis ME, McCammon JA: Combined comformational search and finite-difference Poisson-Boltzmann approach for flexible docking. J Mol Biol 1994, 238:455-465. Initially, a Monte Carlo conformational search was carried out using a scheme including desolvation-mimicking electrostatics and approximations to the hydrophobic effect. Low energy structures were re-evaluated using more intensive finite-difference Poisson-Boltzmann electrostatics and a solvent accessibility based hydrophobic term. The method successfully identified low-energy conformations of a DNA-protein complex that are close to the X-ray structure.
8. Totrov M, Abagyan R: Detailed ab initio prediction of lysozyme-antibody complex with 1.6 Å accuracy. Nature Struct Biol 1994, 1:259-263. This paper provides a multi-stage analysis. Initially, a force field based pseudo-Brownian Monte Carlo minimization was used. The results were re-evaluated, and the top scores re-optimized, using a more complex function which included side-chain entropy considerations and an approximation to the electrostatic polarization. The method was successfully applied to the lysozyme-antibody system.
9. Nauchitel V, Villaverde MC, Sussman F: Solvent accessibility as a predictive tool for the free energy of inhibitor binding to the HIV-1 protease. Protein Sci 1995, 4:1356-1364.
10. Cummings MD, Hart TN, Read RJ: Atomic solvation parameters in the analysis of protein-protein docking results. Protein Sci 1995, 4:2087-2099.
11. Meng EC, Kuntz ID, Abraham DJ, Kellogg GE: Evaluating docked complexes with the HINT exponential function and empirical atomic hydrophobicities. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1994, 8:299-306.
12. Vasker IA, Aflalo C: Hydrophobic docking: a proposed enhancement to molecular recognition techniques. Proteins 1994, 20:320-329.
13. Kroeger-Smith MB, Rouzer CA, Taneyhill LA, Smith NA, Hughes SH, Boyer PL, Janssen PAJ, Moereels H, Koymans L, Arnold E et al.: Molecular modeling studies of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase nonnucleoside inhibitors: total energy of complexation as a predictor of drug placement and activity. Protein Sci 1995, 4:2203-2222.
14. Holloway MK, Wai JM, Halgren TA, Fitzgerald PMD, Vacca JP, Dorsey BD, Levin RB, Thompson WJ, Chan LJ, DeSolms SJ et al.: A priori prediction of activity for HIV-1 protease inhibitors employing energy minimization in the active site. J Med Chem 1995, 38:305-317.
15. Bohm H-J: The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1994, 8:243-256.
16. Lee KH, Xie D, Freire E, Amzel LM: Estimation of changes in side chain configurational entropy in binding and folding: general methods and application to helix formation. Proteins 1994, 20:68-84.
17. Gschwend DA, Good AC, Kuntz ID: Molecular docking towards drug discovery. J Mol Recognit 1996, in press.
18. Tulip WR, Harley VR, Webster RG, Novotny J: N9 neuraminidase complexes with antibodies NC41 and NC10: empirical free energy calculations capture specificity trends observed with mutant binding data. Biochemistry 1994, 33:7986-7997.
19. Wallqvist A, Jernigan RL, Covell DG: A preference-based free-energy parameterization of enzyme-inhibitor binding. Applications to HIV-1 protease inhibitor design. Protein Sci 1995, 4:1881-1903. Thirty-eight protein complex structures were used to obtain contact frequencies between pairs of atom types. Contact area based free energies of association were estimated from these statistics. These values were applied to a set of inhibitors bound to HIV-1 protease, and were used to decompose the total free energy into contributions from individual atoms and residues. The inhibitors were found to share a common binding motif.
20. Verkhivker G, Appelt K, Freer ST, Villafranca JE: Empirical free energy calculations of ligand-protein crystallographic complexes. I. Knowledge-based ligand-protein interaction potentials applied to the prediction of human immunodeficiency virus 1 protease. Protein Eng 1995, 7:677-691. Distance-dependent atomic pair potentials for 12 types of atom pairs were obtained by inverse-Boltzmann analysis of the free HIV-1 protease structure and 30 ligand-protein complexes. These were used to decompose the interaction free energy of some of the complexes into contributions from polar, non-polar, solvent and conformational effects. Overall predicted free energies of interaction were consistent with experiment.
21. Tomioka N, Itai A: GREEN: A program package for docking studies in rational drug design. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1994, 8:347-366.
22. Kuntz ID, Blaney JM, Oatley SJ, Langridge R, Ferrin TE: A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol 1982, 161:269-288.
23. Meng EC, Shoichet BK, Kuntz ID: Automated docking with grid-based energy evaluation. J Comput Chem 1992, 13:505-524.
24. 50 (the concentration of inhibitor that will inhibit 50% of an enzyme's activity) value of 150 nM.
25. Bohm H-J: On the use of LUDI to search the fine chemicals directory for ligands of proteins of known three-dimensional structure. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1994, 8:623-632.
26. Mizutani M, Tomioka N, Itai A: Rational automatic search method for stable docking models of protein and ligand. J Mol Biol 1994, 243:310-326.
27. Fischer D, Lin SL, Wolfson HL, Nussinov R: A geometry-based suite of molecular docking processes. J Mol Biol 1995, 248:459-477.
28. Lin SL, Nussinov R, Fischer D, Wolfson HJ: Molecular surface representation by sparse critical points. Proteins 1994, 18:94-101. This method reduces a molecular surface to a much smaller number of caps, pits and belts and their surface normals. The number of points required to represent a heme group is reduced by a factor of 16. The critical points are suitable for use in rapid molecular recognition.
29. Sandak B, Nussinov R, Wolfson HJ: An automated computer vision and robotics-based technique for 3-D flexible biomolecular docking and matching. Comput Appl Biosci 1995, 11:87-99.
30. Harrison RW, Kurinov IV, Andrews LC: The Fourier-Green's function and the rapid evaluation of molecular potentials. Protein Eng 1994, 7:359-369.
31. Kurinov IV, Harrison RW: Prediction of new serine proteinase inhibitors. Nature Struct Biol 1994, 1:735-743. Binding constants for a series of trypsin inhibitors are calculated using a Fourier transformation to enable rapid evaluation of ligand translations. This allows a fairly thorough search of six-dimensional space, as well as some conformational exploration using molecular dynamics. X-ray structures of the complexes were solved, and found to be similar to the predictions.
32. Rosenfeld R, Vajda S, DeLisi C: Flexible docking and design. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 1995, 24:677-700. An excellent review of the problems that complicate ligand docking and design, and some of the proposed solutions.
33. Leach AR: Ligand docking to proteins with discrete side-chain flexibility. J Mol Biol 1994, 235:345-356.
34. Gehlhaar DK, Verkhivker GM, Rejto PA, Sherman CJ, Fogel DB, Fogel LJ, Freer ST: Molecular recognition of the inhibitor AG-1343 by HIV-1 protease: conformationally flexible docking by evolutionary programming. Chem Biol 1995, 2:317-324. Although using a restricted search volume, and though the method of optimization of the force field may have led to some memorization of features of the HIV-protease active site, results still clustered well, with several runs producing high-scoring solutions within 1.5 Å of the crystal structure.
35. Oshiro CM, Kuntz ID, Dixon JS: Flexible ligand docking using a genetic algorithm. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1995, 9:113-130. A force-field scoring function was used to dock inhibitors to thymidylate synthase and to the two old favourites HIV protease and DHFR. Several dockings had calculated scores better than the crystal structures, nicely illustrating the imperfections in the force field and the need for more work in this area. An interesting innovation was to seed the genetic algorithm with a range of analogous compounds to carry out multiple simultaneous screening.
36. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC: Molecular recognition of receptor sites using a genetic algorithm with a description of desolvation. J Mol Biol 1995, 245:43-53. In addition to van der Waals internal and complexation energy, the fitness function includes a term for hydrogen bonds, with compensation for the desolvation that occurs on binding. Examples are given of compounds docking to DHFR, L-arabinose-binding protein and influenza sialidase.
37. Westhead DR, Clark DE, Frenkel D, Li J, Murray CW, Robson B, Waszkowycz B: PRO-LIGAND: an approach to de novo molecular design. 3. A genetic algorithm for structure refinement J Comput Aided Mol Des 1995, 9:139-148.
38. Clark KP, Ajay: Flexible ligand docking without parameter adjustment across four ligand-receptor complexes. J Comput Chem 1995, 16:1210-1226.
39. Judson RS, Tan YT, Mori E, Melius C, Jaeger EP, Treasurywala AM, Mathiowetz A: Docking flexible molecules: a case study of three proteins. J Comput Chem 1995, 16:1405-1419. A standard force field was used both with and without a continuum solvent model to dock 10 flexible ligands to their receptors. A clear improvement was found with the solvent model.
40. Meadows RP, Hajduk PJ: A genetic algorithm-based protocol for docking ensembles of small ligands using experimental restraints. J Biomol NMR 1995, 5:41-47.
41. Luty BA, Wasserman ZR, Stouten PFW, Hodge CN, Zacharias M, McCammon JA: A molecular mechanics/grid method for evaluation of ligand-receptor interactions. J Comput Chem 1995, 16:454-464.
42. DiNola A, Roccatano D, Berendsen HJC: Molecular dynamics simulations of the docking of substrates to proteins. Proteins 1994, 19:174-182.
43. Huber T, Torda AE, Van Gunsteren WF: Local elevation: a method for improving the searching properties of molecular dynamics simulation. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1994, 8:695-708.
44. Lewis RA, Leach AR: Current methods for site-directed structure generation. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1994, 8:467-475.
45. Gillet VJ, Johnson AP, Mata P, Sike S, Williams P: SPROUT: a program for structure generation. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1993, 7:127-153.
46. Bohacek RS, McMartin C: Multiple highly diverse structures complementary to enzyme binding sites: results of extensive application of a de novo design method incorporating combinatorial growth. J Am Chem Soc 1994, 116:5560-5571.
47. Bohm H-J: LUDI: rule based automatic design of new substituents for enzyme inhibitor leads. J Comp Aided Mol Des 1992, 6:593-606.
48. Caflisch A, Miranker A, Karplus M: Multiple copy simultaneous search and construction of ligands in binding sites: application to inhibitors of HIV-1 aspartic protease. J Med Chem 1993, 36:2142-2167.
49. Eisen MB, Wiley DC, Karplus M, Hubbard RE: HOOK: a program for finding novel molecular architectures that satisfy the chemical and steric requirements of a macromolecule binding site. Proteins 1994, 19:199-221.
50. Glen RC, Payne AWR: A genetic algorithm for the automated generation of molecules within constraints. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1995, 9:181-202. A substructure-assembly fragment-linking method. Novel features include the use of constraints other than active site complementarity, including chirality, a calculated octanol/water partition coefficient to estimate bio-availability, and a list of disallowed bonded-atom quartets to make the solution more synthetically attractive.
51. Roe DC, Kuntz ID: Builder v.2: improving the chemistry of a de novo design strategy. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1995, 9:269-282. Another example of a fragment-linking method. Molecules placed using DOCK are joined by database fragments fitted to a random lattice. A list of allowed bonded atom triplets is included to force the generation of more synthetically practical molecules.
52. Johnson AP, Marshall C, Judson PN: Starting material oriented retrosynthetic analysis in the LHASA program. J Chem Inform Comput Sci 1992, 32:411-417.
53. Pearlman DA, Murcko MA: CONCEPTS: New dynamic algorithm for de novo drug suggestion. J Comput Chem 1993, 14:1184-1193.
54. Gehlhaar DK, Moerder KE, Zichi D, Sherman CJ, Ogden RC, Freer ST: De novo design of enzyme inhibitors by Monte Carlo ligand generation. J Med Chem 1995, 38:466-472. An interesting approach in which atoms are packed into the active site and allowed to rearrange and change type under Monte Carlo evolution. Intramolecular energy terms allow the formation of realistic chemical structure, while heuristics are used to encourage aromaticity and discourage unreasonable bond types.