Binding affinity prediction with property-encoded shape distribution signatures

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 50, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 298-308

  Das, Sourav ^a   Krein, Michael P ^a   Breneman, Curt M ^b  

^a Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute   (United States)

^b RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BINDING ENERGY; COMPLEXATION; LIGANDS; PROTEINS;

BINDING AFFINITIES; GOOD CORRELATIONS; MOLECULAR SHAPES; MOLECULAR SIGNATURES; PROTEIN-LIGAND COMPLEXES; SCORING FUNCTIONS; SHAPE DISTRIBUTION; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE TECHNIQUES;

SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES;

LIGAND; PROTEIN;

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; METABOLISM; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; QUALITY CONTROL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; BENCHMARKING; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEINS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

EID: 77649229098     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci9004139     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Gehlhaar, D. K.; Verkhivker, G. M.; Rejto, P. A.; Sherman, C. J.; Fogel, D. R.; Fogel, L. J.; Freer, S. T. Molecular recognition of the inhibitor AG-1343 by HIV-I protease: Conformationally flexible docking by evolutionary programming. Chem. Biol. 1995, 2, 317324.
2. Muegge, I.; Martin, Y. C. A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: A simplified potential approach. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 791-804.
3. 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. Des. 1994, 8, 243256.
4. Rarey, M.; Kramer, B.; Lengauer, T.; Klebe, G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J. Mol. Biol. 1996, 261, 470-489.
5. Jones, G.; Willett, P.; Glen, R. C.; Leach, A. R.; Taylor, R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J. Mol. Biol. 1997, 267, 727-748.
6. Ewing, T. J. A.; Makino, S.; Skillman, A. G.; Kuntz, I. D. DOCK 4.0: Search strategies for automated molecular docking of flexible molecule databases. J. Comout.-Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 411428.
7. Eldridge, M. D.; Murray, C. W.; Auton, T. R.; Paolini, G. V.; Mee, R. P. Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes. J. Comput-Aided Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 425-445.
8. Morris, G. M.; Goodsell, D. S.; Halliday, R. S.; Huey, R.; Hart, W. E.; Belew, R. K.; Olson, A. J. Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. J. Comput. Chem. 1998, 19, 1639-1662.
9. Gohlke, H.; Hendlich, M.; Klebe, G. Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 2000, 295, 337356.
10. Wang, R.; Lai, L.; Wang, S. Further development and validation of empirical scoring functions for structure-based binding affinity prediction. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16, 11-26.
11. Sotriffer, C. A.; Sanschagrin, P.; Matter, H.; Klebe, G. SFCscore: Scoring functions for affinity prediction of protein-ligand complexes. Proteins: Struct., Funct., Bioinf. 2008, 73, 395-419.
12. Yin, S.; Biedermannova, L.; Vondrasek, J.; Dokhoiyan, N. V. MedusaScore: An accurate force field-based scoring function for virtual drug screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 1656-1662.
13. Zhang, S.; Golbraikh, A.; Tropsha, A. Development of quantitative structure-binding affinity relationship models based on novel geometrical chemical descriptors of the protein-ligand interfaces. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 2713-2724.
14. Beveridge, D. L.; Dicapua, F. M. Free energy via molecular simulation: Applications to chemical and biomolecular systems. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biophys. Chem. 1989, 18, 431-492.
15. Kollman, P. Free energy calculations: Applications to chemical and biochemical phenomena. Chem. Rev. 1993, 93, 2395-2417.
16. Bash, P. A.; Singh, U. C.; Langridge, R.; Kollman, P. A. Free energy calculations by computer simulation. Science 1987, 236, 564-568.
17. Dang, L. X.; Merz, K. M.; Kollman, P. A. Free energy calculations on protein stability: Thr-157.fwdarw. Val-157 mutation of T4 lysozyme. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 8505-8508.
18. Cheng, T.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Liu, Z.; Wang, R. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 1079-1093.
19. Ladbury, J. E.; Williams, M. A. The extended interface: measuring non-local effects in biomolecular interactions. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2004, 14, 562-569.
20. Olsson, T. S. G.; Williams, M. A.; Pitt, W. R.; Ladbury, J. E. The thermodynamics of protein-ligand interaction and solvation: Insights for ligand design. J. Mol. Biol. 2008, 384, 1002-1017.
21. Das, S.; Kokardekar, A.; Breneman, C. M. Rapid comparison of protein binding site surfaces with property encoded shape distributions. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 2863-2872.
22. Stiefl, N.; Baumann, K. Structure-based validation of the 3D-QSAR technique MaP. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 739-749.
23. Wagener, M.; Sadowski, J.; Gasteiger, J. Autocorrelation of molecular surface properties for modeling corticosteroid binding globulin and cytosolic Ah receptor activity by neural networks. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 117, 7769-7775.
24. Renner, S.; Schneider, G. Scaffold-hopping potential of ligand-based similarity concepts. Chem Med Chem 2006, 1, 181-185.
25. Breneman, C. M.; Sundling, C. M.; Sukumar, N.; Shen, L.; Katt, W. P.; Embrechts, M. J. New developments in PEST shape/property hybrid descriptors. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17, 231-240.
26. Zauhar, R. J.; Moyna, G.; Tian, L.; Li, Z.; Welsh, W. J. Shape signatures: A new approach to computer-aided ligand- and receptorbased drug design. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 5674-5690.
27. Noble, W. S. What is a support vector machine. Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24, 1565-1567.
28. Lapinsh, M.; Prusis, P.; Gutcaits, A.; Lundstedt, T.; Wikberg, J. E. S. Development of proteo-chemometrics: a novel technology for the analysis of drug-receptor interactions. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2001, 1525, 180-190.
29. Strömbergsson, H.; Daniluk, P.; Kryshtafovych, A.; Fidelis, K.; Wikberg, J. E. S.; Kleywegt, G. J.; Hvidsten, T. R. Interaction model based on local protein substructures generalizes to the entire structural enzyme-ligand space. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 2278-2288.
30. Ortiz, A. R.; Pisabarro, M. T.; Gago, F.; Wade, R. C. Prediction of drug binding affinities by comparative binding energy analysis. J. Med. Chem. 1995, 38, 2681-2691.
31. Datar, P. A.; Khedkar, S. A.; Malde, A. K.; Coutinho, E. C. Comparative residue interaction analysis (CoRIA): a 3D-QSAR approach to explore the binding contributions of active site residues with ligands. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2006, 20, 343-360.
32. Gohlke, H.; Klebe, G. DrugScore meets CoMFA: adaptation of fields for molecular comparison (AFMoC) or how to tailor knowledge-based pair-potentials to a particular protein. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 41534170.
33. Vijayan, R. S. K.; Bera, I.; Prabu, M.; Saha, S.; Ghoshal, N. Combinatorial library enumeration and lead hopping using comparative interaction fingerprint analysis and classical 2D QSAR methods for seeking novel GABAA α3 modulators. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 2498-2511.
34. Lindström, A.; Pettersson, F.; Almquist, F.; Berglund, A.; Kihlberg, J.; Linusson, A. Hierarchical PLS modeling for predicting the binding of a comprehensive set of structurally diverse protein-ligand complexes. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 1154-1167.
35. Head, R.; Smythe, M. L.; Oprea, T. I.; Waller, C. L.; Green, S. M.; Marshall, G. R. VALIDATE: A new method for the receptor-based prediction of binding affinities of novel ligands. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 3959-3969.
36. Deng, W.; Breneman, C.; Embrechts, M. J. Predicting protein-ligand binding affinities using novel geometrical descriptors and machinelearning methods. J. Chem.. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 699-703.
37. Wang, R; Fang, X.; Lu, Y.; Yang, C. Y.; Wang, S. The PDBbind Database: Methodologies and updates. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 4111-4119.
38. Wang, R; Fang, X.; Lu, Y.; Wang, S. The PDBbind Database: Collection of binding affinities for protein-ligand complexes with known threedimensional structures. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 2977-2980.
39. Wang, R.; Lu, Y.; Fang, X.; Wang, S. An extensive test of 14 scoring functions using the PDBbind refined set of 800 protein-ligand complexes. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 2114-2125.
40. Labute, P. Protonate3D: Assignment of ionization states and hydrogen coordinates to macromolecular structures. Proteins: Struct.. Funct., Bioinf. 2009, 75, 187-205.
41. Molecular Operating Environment, Version 2007.09; Chemical Computing Group, Inc.: Montreal, QC, 2007.
42. Ryan, M. D.; Hepburn, T.; Sukumar, N.; Das, S.; Breneman, C. M. TAE Augmented Scoring Functions: Two Approaches, Atom and Surface Based; Abstracts of Papers, 234th ACS National Meeting, Boston, MA, August 19-23, 2007; COMP-42.
43. Das, S.; Breneman, C. M.; Ryan, M. D. TAE Augmented Scoring Functions: Application to Enzymatic and Non-enzymatic Proteins; Abstracts of Papers, 235th ACS National Meeting, New Orleans, LA, April 6-10, 2008; COMP-121.
44. Berman, H. M.; Battistuz, T.; Bhat, T. N.; Bluhm, W. F.; Bourne, P. E.; Burkhardt, K.; Feng, Z.; Gilliland, G. L.; Iype, L.; Jain, S.; Fagan, P.; Marvin, J.; Padilla, D.; Ravichandran, V.; Schneider, B.; Thanki, N.; Weissig, H.; Westbrook, J. D.; Zardecki, C. The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000, 28, 235-242.
45. Labute, P. An integrated application in MOE for the visualization and analysis of protein active sites with molecular surfaces, contact statistics and electrostatic maps. J. Chem. Comput. Group [Online] 2006; http://www.chemcomp. com/journal/f-surfmap.htm (accessed Dec. 18, 2009).
46. Santavy, M.; Labute, P. Electrostatic fields and surfaces in MOE. J. Chem. Comput. Group [Online] 1998; http://www.chemcomp.com/journal/grid.htm (accessed Dec. 18, 2009).
47. Osada, R.; Funkhouser, T.; Chazelle, B.; Dobkin, D. Shape distributions. ACM Trans. Graph. 2002, 21, 807-832.
48. A Brief Introduction to the PDBbind bind Database v.2007; http://swl6.im.med.umich.edii/database.s/PDBbi.nd4)dfs/PDBbind-2007-intro.pdf (accessed Dec. 18, 2009).
49. Dimitriadou, E.; Hornik, K.; Leisch, F.; Meyer, D.; Weingessel, A. Package "e1071"; http ://cran.r-project.org/web/[3ackages/el071/el071. pdf (accessed Dec. 18, 2009).
50. Ripley, B. D. The {R} project in statistical computing. MSOR Connections. Newsletter of the LTSN Maths, Stats & OR Network 2001, 1, 23-25.
51. Bursulaya, B.; Totrov, M.; Abagyan, R.; Brooks, C. Comparative study of several algorithms for flexible ligand docking. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17, 755-763.
52. Wang, R.; Lu, Y.; Wang, S. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 2287-2303.
53. Dragos, H.; Gilles, M.; Alexandre, V. Predicting the predictability: A unified approach to the applicability domain problem of QSAR models. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 1762-1776.
54. Weaver, S.; Gleeson, M. P. The importance of the domain of applicability in QSAR modeling. J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 2008, 26, 1315-1326.
55. Guha, R.; Schurer, S. Utilizing high throughput screening data for predictive toxicology models: protocols and application to MLSCN assays. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2008, 22, 367-384.
56. Guha, R. On the interpretation and interpretability of quantitative structure-activity relationship models. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2008, 22, 857-871.
57. Gohlke, H.; Klebe, G. Approaches to the description and prediction of the binding affinity of small-molecule ligands to macromolecular receptors. Angew. Chem., Inf. Ed. 2002, 41, 2644-2676.
58. Sharman, G. J.; Searle, M. S.; Benhamu, B.; Groves, P.; Williams, D. H. Burial of hydrocarbon causes cooperative enhancement of electrostatic binding. Aneew. Chem.. Int. Ed. Engl. 1995, 34, 1483-1485.
59. Williams, D. H.; Maguire, A. J.; Tsuzuki, W.; Westwell, M. S. An analysis of the origins of a cooperative binding energy of dimerization. Science 1998, 280, 711-714.
60. Gilli, P.; Ferretti, V.; Gilli, G.; Borea, P. A. Enthalpy-entropy compensation in drug-receptor binding. J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 98, 15151518.
61. LaLonde, J. M.; Levenson, M. A.; Roe, J. J.; Bernlohr, D. A.; Banaszak, L. J. Adipocyte lipid-binding protein complexed with arachidonic acid. Titration calorimetry and X-ray crystallographic studies. J. Biol. Chem. 1994, 269, 25339-25347.
62. Hensen, C.; Hermann, J. C.; Nam, K.; Ma, S.; Gao, J.; Höltje, H. D. A combined QM/MM approach to protein-ligand interactions: Polarization effects of the HIV-I protease on selected high affinity inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 6673-6680.
63. Das, D.; Koh, Y.; Tojo, Y.; Ghosh, A. K.; Mitsuya, H. Prediction of potency of protease inhibitors using free energy simulations with polarizable quantum mechanics-based ligand charges and a hybrid water model J. Chem., Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 2851-2862.
64. Verkhivker, G.; Appelt, K.; Freer, S. T.; Villafranca, J. E. 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.; Des. Sel. 1995, 8, 677-691.
65. Tame, J. R. Scoring functions - the first 100 years. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2005, 19, 445-451.
66. Ajay; Murcko, M. A. Computational methods to predict binding free energy in ligand-receptor complexes. J. Med. Chem. 1995, 38, 49534967.
67. Sales, A. P.; Tomaras, G.; Kepler, T. Improving peptide-MHC class I binding prediction for unbalanced datasets. BMC Bioinf. 2008, 9, 385.
68. Leach, A. R.; Shoichet, B. K.; Peishoff, C. E. Prediction of proteinligand interactions. Docking and scoring: Successes and gaps. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 5851-5855.
69. Tirado-Rives, J.; Jorgensen, W. L. Contribution of conformer focusing to the uncertainty in predicting free energies for protein-ligand binding. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 5880-5884.