PrGen: Pseudoreceptor modeling using receptor-mediated ligand alignment and pharmacophore equilibration

Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 122-130

  Zbinden, Peter ^a,b   Dobler, Max ^c   Folkers, Gerd ^c   Vedani, Angelo ^a  

^a Biographics Laboratory 3R   (Switzerland)

^b AG   (Switzerland)

^c ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

3D QSAR; Cannabinoid receptor surrogate; Correlation coupled energy refinement; Ligand equilibration; Pseudoreceptor modeling; Receptor mediated ligand alignment

Indexed keywords

BINDING ENERGY; CONFORMATIONS; FREE ENERGY; MOLECULES; PHARMACODYNAMICS;

3D-QSAR; BINDING AFFINITIES; CANNABINOID RECEPTOR SURROGATE; CANNABINOID RECEPTORS; CORRELATION-COUPLED ENERGY REFINEMENT; ENERGY REFINEMENTS; LIGAND EQUILIBRATION; PHARMACOPHORES; PSEUDORECEPTOR MODEL; RECEPTOR MEDIATED LIGAND ALIGNMENT;

LIGANDS;

CANNABINOID RECEPTOR; CANNABINOID RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST; DRUG CARRIER; LIGAND;

ARTICLE; BINDING AFFINITY; ENTROPY; LIGAND BINDING; MOLECULAR MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0031954203     PISSN: 09318771     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1521-3838(199804)17:02<122::aid-qsar122>3.3.co;2-c     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Frühbeis, H., Klein, R. and Wallmeier, H., Computer-assisted molecular design - An overview. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 26, 403-418 (1987).
2. Snyder, J.P. and Rao, S.N., Pseudoreceptors: A bridge between receptor fitting and receptor mapping in drug design. Chem. Design Automation News 4, 13-15 (1989).
3. Snyder, J.P. and Rao, S.N., Pseudoreceptor modeling: An experiment in large-scale computing. Cray Channels 11, 4-12 (1990).
4. Momany, F., Pitha, R., Klimkowsky, V.J. and Venkatachalam, C.M., Drug design using a protein pseudoreceptor. In: Expert Systems and Applications in Chemistry, Hohne, B.A. and Pierce, T.H. (Eds.), ACS Symp. Ser. 408, 82-91 (1989).
5. Hong, J.-L., Namgoong, S.K., Bernardi, A. and Still, W.C., Highly selective binding of simple peptides by a C3-macrotricyclic receptor. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 113, 5111-5112 (1990).
6. Snyder, J.P., Rao, S.N., Koehler, K.F. and Pellicciari, R., Drug modeling at cell membrane receptors: The concept of pseudoreceptors. In: Trends in Receptor Research, Angeli, P., Gulini, U. and Quaglia, W. (Eds.), Elsevier Science Publishers: Amsterdam 1992, pp. 367-403.
7. Snyder, J.P., Rao, S.N., Koehler, K.F. and Vedani, A., Pseudoreceptors. In: 3D QSAR in Drug Design, Kubinyi, H. (Ed.), ESCOM Science Publishers, Leiden 1993, pp. 336-354.
8. +-ATPase. Pharmazie 47, 691-698 (1992).
9. Walters, D.E. and Hinds, R.M., Genetically evolved receptor models: A computational approach to construction of receptor models. J. Med. Chem. 37, 2527-2536 (1994).
10. Doweyko, A.M., Three-dimensional pharmacophores from binding data. J. Med. Chem. 37, 1769-1778 (1994).
11. Hahn, M., Receptor surface models. 1. Definition and construction. J. Med. Chem. 38, 2080-2090 (1995).
12. Hahn, M. and Rogers, D., Receptor surface models. 2. Application to quantitative structure-activity studies. J. Med. Chem. 38, 2091-2102 (1995).
13. Vedani, A., Zbinden, P. and Snyder, J.P., Pseudoreceptor modeling: A new concept for the three-dimensional construction of receptor binding sites. J. Receptor Research 13, 163-177 (1993).
14. Vedani, A., Zbinden, P., Snyder, J.P. and Greenidge, P.A., Pseudoreceptor modeling: The construction of three-dimensional receptor surrogates. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 117, 4987-4994 (1995).
15. 3-hybridized O atoms and its relevance to ligand-macromolecule interactions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 106, 1018-1025 (1984).
16. Taylor, R. and Kennard, O., Hydrogen bonding geometry in organic crystals. Acc. Chem. Res. 17, 320-326 (1984).
17. Baker, E.N. and Hubbard, R.E., Hydrogen bonding in globular proteins. Prog. Biophys. Molec. Biol. 44, 97-179 (1984).
18. Vedani, A. and Dunitz, J.D., Lone-pair directionality of H-bond potential functions for molecular mechanics calculations: The inhibition of human carbonic anhydrase II by sulfonamides. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 107, 7653-7658 (1985).
19. Tintelnot, M. and Andrews, P., Geometries of functional group interactions in enzyme-ligand complexes: Guides for receptor modeling. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design 3, 67-84 (1989).
20. Alexander, R.S., Kanyo, Z.F., Chirlian, L.E. and Christianson, D.W., The stereochemistry of phosphate-lewis acid interactions for nucleic acid structure and recognition. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 112, 933-937 (1990).
21. Klebe, G. and Diederich, F., A comparison of the crystal packing in benzene with the geometry seen in crystalline cyclophane-benzene complexes: Guidelines for rational design. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. A 345, 37-48 (1993).
22. Klebe, G., The use of composite crystal-field environments in molecular recognition and the de novo design of protein ligands. J. Mol. Biol. 237, 212-235 (1994).
23. Vedani, A. and Huhta, D.W., A new force field for modeling metalloproteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 112, 4759-4767 (1990).
24. Marengo, E. and Todeschini, R., A new algorithm for optimal, distance-based experimental design. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 16, 37-44 (1992).
25. To apply this algorithm, either a "primordial receptor model" or a "van-der-Waals envelope" must be generated beforehand. The former may simply consist of a few key amino-acid residues appropriately positioned in 3-D space while the latter is defined by virtual particles (for example with a radius r=0.8 Å and a well-depth ε = 0.024 kcal/mol) surrounding the ensemble of ligand molecules - an option with PrGen. For receptor models, the interactions are calculated according a the direction force field [23]. For virtual envelopes, the vander-Waals interactions between each ligand and any virtual particle are calculated using a 6-12 potential; the electrostatic field is computed using a partial charge of +1.0 on the virtual particle; H-bond interactions do not exist with a virtual construct. Next, the three classes (electrostatic, vander-Waals, and H-bond interactions) are each mean centered and scaled (to range from -1.0 to +1.0)) - in order to equally weight the different terms. Optionally, the experimental ΔG° might also be included as a parameter contributing to "the minimum distance".
26. Ponder, J.W. and Richards, F.M., Tertiary templates for proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 193, 775-791 (1987).
27. Blaney, J.M., Weiner, P.K., Dearing, A., Kollman, P.A., Jorgensen, E.C., Oatley, S.J., Burridge, J.M. and Blake, J.F., Molecular mechanics simulation of protein-ligand interactions: Binding of thyroid analogues to prealbumin. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 104, 6424-6434 (1982).
28. Krystek, S., Stouch, T. and Novotny, J., Affinity and specificity of serine endopeptidase-protein inhibitor interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 234, 661-679 (1993).
29. Böhm, 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. Design 8, 243-256 (1994).
30. Holloway, M.K., Wai, J.M., Halgren, T.A., Fitzgerald, P.M.D., Vacca, J.P., Dorsey, B.D., Levin, R.B., Thompson, W.J., Chen, L.J., deSolms, S.J., Gaffin, N., Gosh, A.K., Giuliani, E.A., Graham, S.L., Guare, J.P., Hungate, R.W., Lyle, T.A., Sanders, W.M., Tucker, T.J., Wiggins, M., Wiscount, C.M., Woltersdorf, O.W., Young, S.D., Darke, P.L. and Zugay, J. A., A priori prediction of activity for HIV-1 protease inhibitors employing energy minimization in the active site. J. Med. Chem. 38, 305-317 (1995).
31. Still, W.C., Tempczyk, A., Hawley, R.C. and Hendrickson, T., Semianalytical treatment of solvation for molecular mechanics and dynamics. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 112, 6127-6129 (1990).
32. Searle, M.S. and Williams, D.H., The cost of conformational order: Entropy changes in molecular associations. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 114, 10690-10697 (1992).
33. As in a pseudoreceptor context, "n" ligand molecules bind "simultaneously" to an averaged receptor model, the non-bonded list is modified in such a way that each ligand interacts with the pseudoreceptor, but is not affected by any of the other ligand molecules. Moreover, all interactions between pseudoreceptor and ligand atoms are normalized, removing the dependency of the forces experienced by pseudoreceptor atoms from the total number of ligand molecules present in the system.
34. During correlation-coupled refinement, we limit the target RMS deviation to a value corresponding to the experimental error associated with the binding affinities - as the model may not be more accurate than the experimental data it is based on (typically 0.130 or 0.236 kcal/mol, corresponding to uncertainties of 25% and 50% in the experimental binding affinity, respectively).
35. During the Monte-Carlo procedure, the position, orientation and conformation of each ligand molecule is typically altered 100-250 times using the Metropolis criterion for accepting or rejecting a new position, orientation and conformation. By default, every tenth structure is minimized retaining that with the lowest total energy for each ligand molecule. The range of the underlying positional, orientational and conformational changes is individually adjusted for each ligand molecule such as to keep the ratio of accepted and rejected positions, orientations and conformations close to unity. To calculate the Boltzman factor for the Metropolis criterion, we typically use a temperature of 10,000 K. Moreover, only those positions, orientations and conformations are accepted which feature a RMS separation of greater than typically 0.5 Å compared to the previously minimized ligand structure. This avoids the reproduction of spatially close positions, orientations and conformations.
36. As a result one would expect the (now) predicted free binding energies being close to the ones calculated for the training set. Moreover, position, orientation and conformation of the individual ligand pairs (in the true training set and the "training set treated as a test set", respectively) should be acceptably close - typically less than 0.5 Å (RMS).
37. solvation,ligand.
38. Johnson, M.R., Melvin, L.S., Althuis, T.H., Bindra, J.S., Harbert, C.A., Milne, G.M. and Weissmann, A., Selective and potent analgesics derived from cannabinoids. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 21, 271-282 (1981).
39. Johnson, M.R. and Melvin, L.S., The discovery of non-classical cannabinoids. In: Cannabinoids as Therapeutic Agents, Mechoulam, R. (Ed.), CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL 1986, pp. 121-146.
40. Reggio, P.H., Seltzman, H.H., Compton, D.R., Prescott, W.R., Martin, J.R. and Martin, B.R., Investigation of the role of phenolic hydroxyl in cannabinoid activity. Mol. Pharmacol. 38, 854-862 (1990).
41. Razdan, R.K., Structure-activity relationships in cannabinoids. Pharmacol. Rev. 38, 75-149 (1986).
42. 8-THC-dimethyl heptyl in mice and dogs. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 32, 661-666 (1989).
43. Kovar, K.A., Cannabis - was ist das? Zur Pharmakologie und Wirkungsweise. DAZ 43, 2302-2305 (1991).
44. Hewlett, A.C., Johnson, M.R., Melvin, L.S. and Milne, G.M., Non-classical cannabinoid analgesics inhibit adenylate cyclase: Development of a cannabinoid receptor model. Mol. Pharmacol. 33, 297-302 (1988).
45. Thomas, B.F., Compton, D.R., Martin, B.R. and Semus, S.F., Modeling the cannabinoid receptor: A three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity analysis. Mol. Pharmacol. 40, 565-661 (1991).
46. Reggio, P.H., Panu, A.M. and Miles, S., Characterization of a region of steric interference at the cannabinoid receptor using the active analog approach. J. Med. Chem. 36, 1761-1771 (1993).
47. Makriyannis, A. and Rapaka, R.S., The molecular basis of cannabinoid activity. Life Sci. 47, 2173-2184 (1990).
48. Devan, W.A., Dysarz, F.A., Johnson, M.R., Melvin, L.S. and Hewlett, A.C., Determination and characterization of a cannabinoid receptor in rat brain. Mol. Pharmacol. 34, 605-613 (1988).
49. Matsuda, L.A., Lolait, S.J., Brownstein, S.J., Young, A.C. and Bonner, T.J., Structure of a cannabinoid receptor and functional expression of the cloned cDNA. Nature 346, 561-564 (1990).
50. Sean, M., Kerrie, L.T. and Muna, A.-S., Molecular characterization of a peripheral receptor for cannabinoids. Nature 365, 61-65 (1993).
51. Schmetzer, S., Greenidge, P.A., Kovar, K.A. and Folkers, G., Structure-activity relationships of cannabinoids: A joint CoMFA and pseudoreceptor modeling study. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design (in press).
52. Weiner, S.J., Kollmann, P.A., Case, D.A., Singh, U.C., Ghio, C., Alagona, G., Profeta Jr., S. and Weiner, P., A new force field for molecular mechanical simulation of nucleic acid and proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 106, 765-784 (1984).
53. Mohamadi, F., Richards, N.G.J., Guida, W.C., Liskamp, R., Lipton, M., Caufield, C., Chang, G., Hendrickson, T. and Still, W.C., MacroModel - An integrated software system for modeling organic and bioorganic molecules using molecular mechanics. J. Comput. Chem. 11, 440-467 (1990).
54. Stewart, J.J.P., MOPAC - a semi-empirical molecular orbital program. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design 4, 1-105 (1990). (Distributed by QCPE, University of Indiana, Bloomington, Indiana, USA).
55. Compton, D.R., Rice, K.C., DeCosta, R.K., Razdan, L.S., Melvin, L.S., Johnson, M.R. and Martin, B.R., Cannabinoid structure-activity relationships: Correlation of receptor binding data and in-vivo activities. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Theor. 265, 218-226 (1993).
56. Snyder, J.P. and Xia, X., Minireceptor enzyme active sites: Potency, selectivity and resistance within HIV protease. J. Am. Chem. Soc. (submitted).