Accommodating protein flexibility for structure-based drug design

Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 171-178

  Lin, Jung Hsin ^a,b,c  

^a RESEARCH CENTER FOR APPLIED SCIENCES   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Docking; Drug design; Molecular dynamics; Protein flexibility; Relaxed complex scheme

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BINDING AFFINITY; CONFORMATIONAL TRANSITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; DRUG STRUCTURE; EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHM; GENETIC ALGORITHM; LINEAR INTERACTION ENERGY; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR DOCKING; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR MECHANICS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PARTICLE SWARM ALGORITHM; POISSON BOLTZMANN SURFACE AREA; PROBABILITY; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 78649893079     PISSN: 15680266     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/156802611794863580     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Cammarata, M.; Levantino, M.; Schotte, F.; Anfinrud, P. A.; Ewald, F.; Choi, J.; Cupane, A.; Wulff, M.; Ihee, H. Tracking thestructural dynamics of proteins in solution using time-resolvedwide-angle X-ray scattering. Nat. Methods, 2008, 5, 881-886.
2. Bajaj, V. S.; Mak-Jurkauskas, M. L.; Belenky, M.; Herzfeld, J.; Griffin, R. G. Functional and shunt states of bacteriorhodopsin resolvedby 250 GHz dynamic nuclear polarization-enhanced solidstateNMR. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2009, 106, 9244-9249.
3. English, B. P.; Min, W.; van Oijen, A. M.; Lee, K. T.; Luo, G. B.; Sun, H. Y.; Cherayil, B. J.; Kou, S. C.; Xie, X. S. Ever-fluctuatingsingle enzyme molecules: Michaelis-Menten equation revisited.Nat. Chem. Biol., 2006, 2, 87-94.
4. Freddolino, P. L.; Park, S.; Roux, B.; Schulten, K. Force field biasin protein folding simulations. Biophys. J., 2009, 96, 3772-3780.
5. Hornak, V.; Abel, R.; Okur, A.; Strockbine, B.; Roitberg, A.; Simmerling, C. Comparison of multiple amber force fields and developmentof improved protein backbone parameters. Proteins, 2006, 65, 712-725.
6. Klepeis, J. L.; Lindorff-Larsen, K.; Dror, R. O.; Shaw, D. E. Longtimescalemolecular dynamics simulations of protein structure and function. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., 2009, 19, 120-127.
7. Shaw, D. E.; Deneroff, M. M.; Dror, R. O.; Kuskin, J. S.; Larson, R. H.; Salmon, J. K.; Young, C.; Batson, B.; Bowers, K. J.; Chao, J. C.; Eastwood, M. P.; Gagliardo, J.; Grossman, J. P.; Ho, C. R.; Ierardi, D. J.; Kolossvary, I.; Klepeis, J. L.; Layman, T.; McLeavey, C.; Moraes, M. A.; Mueller, R.; Priest, E. C.; Shan, Y. B.; Spengler, J.; Theobald, M.; Towles, B.; Wang, S. C. Anton, a special-purpose machine for molecular dynamics simulation. Commun.ACM, 2008, 51, 91-97.
8. Wong, C. F.; McCammon, J. A. Protein flexibility and computeraideddrug design. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol., 2003, 43, 31-45.
9. Alonso, H.; Bliznyuk, A. A.; Gready, J. E. Combining docking and molecular dynamic simulations in drug design. Med. Res. Rev., 2006, 26, 531-568.
10. Wong, C. F. Flexible ligand-flexible protein docking in proteinkinase systems, Biochim. Biophys. Acta Protein Proteomics, 2008, 1784, 244-251.
11. B-Rao, C.; Subramanian, J.; Sharma, S. D. Managing protein flexibilityin docking and its applications. Drug Discov. Today, 2009, 14, 394-400.
12. Jain, A. N. Effects of protein conformation in docking: improvedpose prediction through protein pocket adaptation. J. Comput.-Aided. Mol. Des., 2009, 23, 355-374.
13. Friesner, R. A.; Murphy, R. B.; Repasky, M. P.; Frye, L. L.; Greenwood, J. R.; Halgren, T. A.; Sanschagrin, P. C.; Mainz, D. T.Extra precision glide: Docking and scoring incorporating a modelof hydrophobic enclosure for protein-ligand complexes. J. Med.Chem., 2006, 49, 6177-6196.
14. Kondrashov, D. A.; Zhang, W.; Aranda, R.; Stec, B.; Phillips, G.N. Sampling of the native conformational ensemble of myoglobinvia structures in different crystalline environments. Proteins, 2008, 70, 353-362.
15. Steuber, H.; Zentgraf, M.; Gerlach, C.; Sotriffer, C. A.; Heine, A.; Klebe, G. Expect the unexpected or caveat for drug designers: Multiplestructure determinations using aldose reductase crystalstreated under varying soaking and co-crystallisation conditions. J.Mol. Biol., 2006, 363, 174-187.
16. Vorontsov, II.; Miyashita, O. Solution and crystal molecular dynamicssimulation study of m4-cyanovirin-n mutants complexedwith di-mannose. Biophys. J., 2009, 97, 2532-2540.
17. Michel, J.; Tirado-Rives, J.; Jorgensen, W. L. Prediction of thewater content in protein binding sites. J. Phys. Chem. B, 2009, 113, 13337-13346.
18. van Dijk, A. D. J.; Bonvin, A. Solvated docking: introducing waterinto the modelling of biomolecular complexes. Bioinformatics, 2006, 22, 2340-2347.
19. Verdonk, M. L.; Chessari, G.; Cole, J. C.; Hartshorn, M. J.; Murray, C. W.; Nissink, J. W. M.; Taylor, R. D.; Taylor, R. Modelingwater molecules in protein-ligand docking using GOLD. J.Med. Chem., 2005, 48, 6504-6515.
20. Babor, M.; Greenblatt, H. M.; Edelman, M.; Sobolev, V. Flexibilityof metal binding sites in proteins on a database scale. Proteins, 2005, 59, 221-230.
21. Cole, J. C.; Murray, C. W.; Nissink, J. W. M.; Taylor, R. D.; Taylor, R. Comparing protein-ligand docking programs is difficult.Proteins, 2005, 60, 325-332.
22. Abagyan, R.; Totrov, M.; Kuznetsov, D. ICM - A new method forprotein modeling and design - applications to docking and structureprediction from the distorted native conformation. J. Comput.Chem., 1994, 15, 488-506.
23. Totrov, M.; Abagyan, R. Flexible protein-ligand docking by globalenergy optimization in internal coordinates. Proteins, 1997, 215-220.
24. Jones, G.; Willett, P.; Glen, R. C. Molecular recognition of receptor-sites using a genetic algorithm with a description of desolvation.J. Mol. Biol., 1995, 245, 43-53.
25. Jones, G.; Willett, P.; Glen, R. C.; Leach, A. R.; Taylor, R. Developmentand validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking.J. Mol. Biol., 1997, 267, 727-748.
26. Morris, G. M.; Goodsell, D. S.; Halliday, R. S.; Huey, R.; Hart, W.E.; Belew, R. K.; Olson, A. J. Automated docking using a Lamarckiangenetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energyfunction. J. Comput. Chem., 1998, 19, 1639-1662.
27. Kramer, B.; Rarey, M.; Lengauer, T. Evaluation of the FlexX incrementalconstruction algorithm for protein-ligand docking. Proteins, 1999, 37, 228-241.
28. Claussen, H.; Buning, C.; Rarey, M.; Lengauer, T. FlexE: Efficientmolecular docking considering protein structure variations. J. Mol.Biol., 2001, 308, 377-395.
29. Yang, J. M.; Chen, C. C. GEMDOCK: A generic evolutionarymethod for molecular docking. Proteins, 2004, 55, 288-304.
30. Chang, D. T. H.; Oyang, Y. J.; Lin, J. H. MEDock: a web server forefficient prediction of ligand binding sites based on a novel optimizationalgorithm. Nucleic Acids Res., 2005, 33, W233-W238.
31. Thomsen, R.; Christensen, M. H. MolDock: A new technique forhigh-accuracy molecular docking. J. Med. Chem., 2006, 49, 3315-3321.
32. Chen, K.; Li, T. H.; Cao, T. C. Tribe-PSO: A novel global optimizationAlgorithm and its application in molecular docking, Chemomet. Intell. Lab. Syst., 2006, 82, 248-259.
33. Chen, H. M.; Liu, B. F.; Huang, H. L.; Hwang, S. F.; Ho, S. Y.SODOCK: Swarm optimization for highly flexible protein-liganddocking. J. Comput. Chem., 2007, 28, 612-623.
34. Ewing, T. J. A.; Kuntz, I. D. Critical evaluation of search algorithmsfor automated molecular docking and database screening. J.Comput. Chem., 1997, 18, 1175-1189.
35. Friesner, R. A.; Banks, J. L.; Murphy, R. B.; Halgren, T. A.; Klicic, J. J.; Mainz, D. T.; Repasky, M. P.; Knoll, E. H.; Shelley, M.; Perry, J. K.; Shaw, D. E.; Francis, P.; Shenkin, P. S. Glide: A newapproach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J. Med. Chem., 2004, 47, 1739-1749.
36. Trott, O.; Olson, A. J. Software news and update autodock vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoringfunction, efficient optimization, and multithreading. J. Comput.Chem., 31, 455-461.
37. Gillet, V. J.; Willett, P.; Bradshaw, J. Identification of biologicalactivity profiles using substructural analysis and genetic algorithms.J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1998, 38, 165-179.
38. Holland, J. H. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: anintroductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificialintelligence. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, 1975.
39. Evolutionary algorithms in molecular design. Vol. 8, Wiley-VCH,: Weinheim; New York, 2000.
40. Solis, F. J.; Wets, R. J. B. Minimization by random search techniques.Math. Oper. Res., 1981, 6, 19-30.
41. Abagyan, R.; Totrov, M. Biased probability monte-carlo conformationalsearches and electrostatic calculations for peptides and proteins.J. Mol. Biol., 1994, 235, 983-1002.
42. Storn, R.; Price, K. Differential evolution - A simple and efficientadaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces. Technical report; International Computer Science Institute 1995.
43. Cover, T. M.; Thomas, J. A. Elements of Information Theory.Wiley: New York, 1991.
44. Eberhart, R. C.; Shi, Y. H. Special issue on particle swarm optimization.IEEE Transact. Evol. Comput., 2004, 8, 201-203.
45. Namasivayam, V.; Gunther, R. PSO@AUTODOCK: A fast flexiblemolecular docking program based on swarm intelligence.Chem. Biol. Drug Des., 2007, 70, 475-484.
46. Janson, S.; Merkle, D.; Middendorf, M. Molecular docking withmulti-objective particle swarm optimization. Appl. Soft Comput., 2008, 8, 666-675.
47. Perola, E.; Walters, W. P.; Charifson, P. S. A detailed comparisonof current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceuticalrelevance. Proteins-Struct. Funct. Bioinfor., 2004, 56, 235-249.
48. Kontoyianni, M.; McClellan, L. M.; Sokol, G. S. Evaluation of docking performance: Comparative data on docking algorithms. J.Med. Chem., 2004, 47, 558-565.
49. Ferrara, P.; Gohlke, H.; Price, D. J.; Klebe, G.; Brooks, C. L. Assessingscoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. J. Med.Chem., 2004, 47, 3032-3047.
50. Cheng, T. J.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Liu, Z. H.; Wang, R. X. Comparativeassessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set. J. Chem. Inf.Model., 2009, 49, 1079-1093.
51. Wang, R. X.; Lu, Y. P.; Fang, X. L.; Wang, S. M. An extensive testof 14 scoring functions using the PDBbind refined set of 800 protein-ligand complexes. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 2004, 44, 2114-2125.
52. Wang, R. X.; Lu, Y. P.; Wang, S. M. Comparative evaluation of 11scoring functions for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem., 2003, 46, 2287-2303.
53. Wang, R. X.; Wang, S. M. How does consensus scoring work forvirtual library screening? An idealized computer experiment. J.Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 2001, 41, 1422-1426.
54. O'Boyle, N. M.; Liebeschuetz, J. W.; Cole, J. C. Testing assumptionsand hypotheses for rescoring success in protein-ligand docking.J. Chem. Inf. Model., 2009, 49, 1871-1878.
55. Clark, R. D.; Strizhev, A.; Leonard, J. M.; Blake, J. F.; Matthew, J.B. Consensus scoring for ligand/protein interactions. J. Mol.Graph. Model., 2002, 20, 281-295.
56. Hansch, C.; Maloney, P. P.; Fujita, T. Correlation of biologicalactivity of phenoxyacetic acids with hammett substituent constantsand partition coefficients. Nature, 1962, 194, 178-&.
57. Huey, R.; Morris, G. M.; Olson, A. J.; Goodsell, D. S. A semiempiricalfree energy force field with charge-based desolvation. J.Comput. Chem., 2007, 28, 1145-1152.
58. Wang, R. X.; Lai, L. H.; Wang, S. M. Further development and validation of empirical scoring functions for structure-based bindingaffinity prediction. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des., 2002, 16, 11-26.
59. Åqvist, J.; Medina, C.; Samuelsson, J. E. New method for predictingbinding-affinity in computer-aided drug design. Protein Eng., 1994, 7, 385-391.
60. Hansson, T.; Marelius, J.; Åqvist, J. Ligand binding affinity predictionby linear interaction energy methods. J. Comput.-Aided Mol.Des., 1998, 12, 27-35.
61. Kollman, P. A.; Massova, I.; Reyes, C.; Kuhn, B.; Huo, S. H.; Chong, L.; Lee, M.; Lee, T.; Duan, Y.; Wang, W.; Donini, O.; Cieplak, P.; Srinivasan, J.; Case, D. A.; Cheatham, T. E. Calculatingstructures and free energies of complex molecules: Combining molecularmechanics and continuum models. Acc. Chem. Res., 2000, 33, 889-897.
62. Massova, I.; Kollman, P. A. Combined molecular mechanical and continuum solvent approach (MM-PBSA/GBSA) to predict ligandbinding. Pers. Drug Discov. Des., 2000, 18, 113-135.
63. Marcus, R. A. Chemical and electrochemical electron-transfertheory. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem., 1964, 15, 155-196.
64. Tidor, B.; Karplus, M. The contribution of cross-links to proteinstability - a normal mode analysis of the configurational entropy of the native-state. Proteins, 1993, 15, 71-79.
65. Karplus, M.; Kushick, J. N. Method for estimating the configurationalentropy of macromolecules. Macromolecules, 1981, 14, 325-332.
66. Brown, S. P.; Muchmore, S. W. High-throughput calculation of protein-ligand binding affinities: Modification and adaptation of the MM-PBSA protocol to enterprise grid computing. J. Chem. Inf.Model., 2006, 46, 999-1005.
67. Brown, S. P.; Muchmore, S. W. Rapid estimation of relative protein-ligand binding affinities using a high-throughput version of MM-PBSA. J. Chem. Inf. Model., 2007, 47, 1493-1503.
68. Brown, S. P.; Muchmore, S. W. Large-scale application of highthroughputmolecular mechanics with Poisson-Boltzmann surfacearea for routine physics-based scoring of protein-ligand complexes.J. Med. Chem., 2009, 52, 3159-3165.
69. Amaro, R. E.; Baron, R.; McCammon, J. A. An improved relaxedcomplex scheme for receptor flexibility in computer-aided drug design.J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des., 2008, 22, 693-705.
70. Lin, J. H.; Perryman, A. L.; Schames, J. R.; McCammon, J. A.Computational drug design accommodating receptor flexibility: The relaxed complex scheme. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2002, 124, 5632-5633.
71. Lin, J. H.; Perryman, A. L.; Schames, J. R.; McCammon, J. A. Therelaxed complex method: Accommodating receptor flexibility fordrug design with an improved scoring scheme. Biopolymers, 2003, 68, 47-62.
72. Shuker, S. B.; Hajduk, P. J.; Meadows, R. P.; Fesik, S. W. Discoveringhigh-affinity ligands for proteins: SAR by NMR. Science, 1996, 274, 1531-1534.
73. Adcock, S. A.; McCammon, J. A. Molecular dynamics: Survey of methods for simulating the activity of proteins. Chem. Rev., 2006, 106, 1589-1615.
74. Amaro, R. E.; Schnaufer, A.; Interthal, H.; Hol, W.; Stuart, K. D.; McCammon, J. A. Discovery of drug-like inhibitors of an essentialRNA-editing ligase in Trypanosoma brucei. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci.USA, 2008, 105, 17278-17283.
75. Schames, J. R.; Henchman, R. H.; Siegel, J. S.; Sotriffer, C. A.; Ni, H. H.; McCammon, J. A. Discovery of a novel binding trench inHIV integrase. J. Med. Chem., 2004, 47, 1879-1881.
76. Perryman, A. L.; Lin, J. H.; McCammon, J. A. Optimization and computational evaluation of a series of potential active site inhibitorsof the V82F/I84V drug-resistant mutant of HIV-1 protease: Anapplication of the relaxed complex method of structure-based drugdesign. Chem. Biol. Drug Des., 2006, 67, 336-345.
77. Senapati, S.; Cheng, Y. H.; McCammon, J. A. In-situ synthesis of atacrine-triazole-based inhibitor of acetylcholinesterase: configurational selection imposed by steric interactions. J. Med. Chem., 2006, 49, 6222-6230.
78. Cheng, L. S.; Amaro, R. E.; Xu, D.; Li, W. W.; Arzberger, P. W.; McCammon, J. A. Ensemble-based virtual screening reveals potentialnovel antiviral compounds for avian influenza neuraminidase.J. Med. Chem., 2008, 51, 3878-3894.
79. Zavodszky, M. I.; Ming, L.; Thorpe, M. F.; Day, A. R.; Kuhn, L.A. Modeling correlated main-chain motions in proteins for flexiblemolecular recognition. Proteins, 2004, 57, 243-261.
80. May, A.; Zacharias, M. Protein-ligand docking accounting forreceptor side chain and global flexibility in normal modes: Evaluationon kinase inhibitor cross docking. J. Med. Chem., 2008, 51, 3499-3506.
81. May, A.; Zacharias, M. Energy minimization in low-frequencynormal modes to efficiently allow for global flexibility during systematicprotein-protein docking. Proteins, 2008, 70, 794-809.
82. Cavasotto, C. N.; Abagyan, R. A. Protein flexibility in ligand dockingand virtual screening to protein kinases. J. Mol. Biol., 2004, 337, 209-225.
83. Rueda, M.; Bottegoni, G.; Abagyan, R. Consistent improvement of cross-docking results using binding site ensembles generated withelastic network normal modes. J. Chem. Inf. Model., 2009, 49, 716-725.
84. Laio, A.; Parrinello, M. Escaping free-energy minima. Proc. Natl.Acad. Sci. USA, 2002, 99, 12562-12566.
85. Kranjc, A.; Bongarzone, S.; Rossetti, G.; Biarnes, X.; Cavalli, A.; Bolognesi, M. L.; Roberti, M.; Legname, G.; Carloni, P. Dockingligands on protein surfaces: the case study of prion protein. J.Chem. Theory Comput., 2009, 5, 2565-2573.
86. Lee, P. H.; Kuo, K. L.; Chu, P. Y.; Liu, E. M.; Lin, J. H. SLITHER: a web server for generating contiguous conformations of substratemolecules entering into deep active sites of proteins or migratingthrough channels in membrane transporters. Nucleic Acids Res., 2009, 37, W559-W564.