The effect of multiple binding modes on empirical modeling of ligand docking to proteins

Protein Science

Volumn 8, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 1134-1143

  Brem, Rachel ^a   Dill, Ken A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Binding affinity; Empirical models; Ligand binding; Multiple binding modes

Indexed keywords

LIGAND;

ARTICLE; BINDING AFFINITY; ENERGY; LIGAND BINDING; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN BINDING; RECEPTOR BINDING;

EID: 0032899364     PISSN: 09618368     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1110/ps.8.5.1134     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Ajay, Murcko MA. 1995. Computational methods to predict binding free energy in ligand-receptor complexes. J Med Chem 38(26):4953-4967.
2. Birdsall B, Feeney J, Tendler SJB, Hammond SJ, Roberts GCK. 1989. Dihydrofolate reductase: Multiple conformations and alternative modes of substrate binding. Biochemistry 28(5):2297-2305.
3. Bohm HJ. 1994. The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure. J Comp-Aid Mol Des 8:243-256.
4. Bohm HJ, Klebe G. 1996. What can we learn from molecular recognition in protein-ligand complexes for the design of new drugs? Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 35:2588-2614.
5. Checa A, Ortiz AR, de Pascual-Teresa B, Gago F. 1997. Assessment of solvation effects on calculated binding affinity differences: Trypsin inhibition by flavonoids as a model system for congeneric series. J Med Chem 40(25):4136-4145.
6. Gilson MK, Given JA, Head MS. 1997. A new class of models for computing receptor-ligand binding affinities. Chem Biol 4(2):87-92.
7. Head MS, Given JA, Gilson MK. 1997. "Mining minima": Direct computation of conformational free energy. J Phys Chem 101:1609-1618.
8. Head RD, Smythe ML, Oprea TI, Waller CL, Green SM, Marshall GR. 1996. VALIDATE: A new method for the receptor-based prediction of binding affinities of novel ligands. J Am Chem Soc 118:3959-3969.
9. Horton N, Lewis M. 1992. Calculation of the free energy of association for protein complexes. Protein Sci 1:169-181.
10. Jackson RM, Sternberg MJE. 1995. A continuum model for protein-protein interactions: Application to the docking problem. J Mol Biol 250:258-275.
11. Jain AN. 1996. Scoring noncovalent protein-ligand interactions: A continuous differentiable function tuned to compute binding affinities. J Comp-Aid Mol Des 10:427-440.
12. Janin J. 1996. Quantifying biological specificity: The statistical mechanics of molecular recognition. Proteins 25(4):438-445.
13. Knegtel RMA, Kuntz ID, Oshiro CM. 1997. Molecular docking to ensembles of protein structures. J Mol Biol 266(2):424-440.
14. Krystek S, Stouch T, Novotny J. 1993. Affinity and specificity of serine endopeptidase-protein inhibitor interactions. Empirical free energy calculations based on X-ray crystallographic structures. J Mol Biol 234(3):661-679.
15. Ladbury JE, Hensmann M, Panayotou G, Campbell ID. 1996. Alternative modes of tyrosyl phosphopeptide binding to a Src family SH2 domain: Implications for regulation of tyrosine kinase activity. Biochemistry 35(34):11062-11069.
16. Mathematica 2.2. 1993. Champaign, Illinois: Wolfram Research, Inc.
17. Mattos C, Rasmussen B, Xiachun D, Petsko GA, Ringe D. 1994. Analogous inhibitors of elastase do not always bind analogously. Nat Struct Biol 1(1): 55-58.
18. Montfort WR, Perry KM, Fauman EB, Finer-Moore JS, Maley GF, Hardy L, Maley F, Stroud RM. 1990. Structure, multiple site binding, and segmental accommodation in thymidylate synthase on binding dUMP and an antifolate. Biochemistry 29(30):6964-6977.
19. Murthy KHM, Winborne EL, Minnich MD, Culp JS, Debouck C. 1992. The crystal structures at 2.2-Å resolution of hydroxyethylene-based inhibitors bound to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease show that the inhibitors are present in two distinct orientations. J Biol Chem 267(32):22770-22778.
20. Ortiz AR, Pisabarro MT, Gago F, Wade RC. 1995. Prediction of drug binding affinities by comparative binding energy analysis. J Med Chem 38(14):2681-2691.
21. Perez C, Pastor M, Ortiz AR, Gago F. 1998. Comparative binding energy analysis of HIV-1 protease inhibitors: Incorporation of solvent effects and validation as a powerful tool in receptor-based drug design. J Med Chem 41(6):836-852.
22. Raag R, Poulos TL. 1991. Crystal structures of cytochrome P-450CAM complexed with camphane, thiocamphor, and adamantane: factors controlling P-450 substrate hydroxylation. Biochemistry 30(10):2674-2684.
23. Vajda S, Weng Z, Rosenfeld R, DeLisi C. 1994. Effect of conformational flexibility and solvation on receptor-ligand binding free energies. Biochemistry 33(41):13977-13988.
24. Verkhivker G, Appelt K, Freer ST, Villafranca JE. 1995. 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 binding affinity. Protein Eng 8(7):677-691.
25. Wallqvist A, Jernigan RL, Covell DG. 1995. A preference-based free-energy parameterization of enzyme-inhibitor binding. Applications to HIV-1-protease inhibitor design. Protein Sci 4(8):1881-1903.
26. Weber PC, Pantoliano MW, Simons DM, Salemme FR. 1994. Structure-based design of synthetic azobenzene ligands for streptavidin. J Am Chem Soc 116(7):2717-2724.
27. Weng Z, Vajda S, DeLisi C. 1996. Prediction of protein complexes using empirical free energy functions. Protein Sci 5(4):614-626.
28. Wilson C, Mace JE, Agard DA. 1991. Computational method for the design of enzymes with altered substrate specificity. J Mol Biol 220(2):495-506.
29. Wojtczak A, Luft J, Cody V. 1992. Mechanism of molecular recognition. Structural aspects of 3,3′-diiodo-L-thyronine binding to human serum transthyretin. J Biol Chem 267(1):353-357.