PepCrawler: A fast RRT-based algorithm for high-resolution refinement and binding affinity estimation of peptide inhibitors

Bioinformatics

Volumn 27, Issue 20, 2011, Pages 2836-2842

  Donsky, Elad ^a   Wolfson, Haim J ^a  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MULTIPROTEIN COMPLEX; PEPTIDE;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; DRUG DESIGN; METABOLISM; METHODOLOGY; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN CONFORMATION;

ALGORITHMS; DRUG DESIGN; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MULTIPROTEIN COMPLEXES; PEPTIDES; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN INTERACTION MAPPING;

EID: 80053940464     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr498     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Andrusier, N. et al. (2007) FireDock: fast interaction refinement in molecular docking. Proteins, 69, 139-159.
2. Antes, I. (2010) DynaDock: a new molecular dynamics-based algorithm for protein- peptide docking including receptor flexibility. Proteins, 78, 1084-1104.
3. Arkin, M.R. and Wells, J.A. (2004) Small-molecule inhibitors of protein-protein interactions: progressing towards the dream. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov., 3, 301-317.
4. Arkin, M.R. and Whitty, A. (2009) The road less traveled: modulating signal transduction enzymes by inhibiting their protein-protein interactions. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol., 13, 284-290.
5. Barr, R.K. et al. (2002) Identification of the critical features of a small peptide inhibitor of JNK activity. J. Biol. Chem., 277, 10987-10997.
6. Bordner, A.J. and Abagyan, R. (2006) Ab initio prediction of peptide-MHC binding geometry for diverse class I MHC allotypes. Proteins, 63, 512-526.
7. Chaudhury, S. and Gray, J.J. (2009) Identification of structural mechanisms of HIV-1 protease specificity using computational peptide docking: implications for drug resistance. Structure, 17, 1636-1648.
8. Cherepanov, P. et al. (2005) Structural basis for the recognition between HIV-1 integrase and transcriptional coactivator p75. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 102, 17308-17313.
9. Cortés, J. et al. (2005)Apath planning approach for computing large-amplitude motions of flexible molecules. Bioinformatics, 21, 116-125.
10. Cortés, J. et al. (2007) Molecular disassembly with RRT-like algorithms. In Proceedings of the International Conference Robotics and Automation, Computer Society Press, Washington DC, pp. 3301-3306
11. Duhovny, D. et al. (2002) Efficient unbound docking of rigid molecules. InWorkshop on Algorithms in Bioinformatics. Vol. 2452 of LNCS, Springer, Berlin, pp. 185-200.
12. Dunbrack, R.L. and Karplus, M. (1994) Conformational analysis of the backbonedependent rotamer preferences of protein sidechains. Nat. Struct. Biol., 1, 334-340.
13. Enosh, A. et al. (2006) Prediction and simulation of motion in pairs of transmembrane α-helices. Bioinformatics, 23, 212-218.
14. Fagerberg, T. et al. (2006) Structural prediction of peptides bound to MHC class I. J. Mol. Biol., 356, 521-546.
15. Fernandez-Ballester, G. et al. (2009) Structure-based prediction of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae SH3-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol., 388, 902-916.
16. Fletcher, S. and Hamilton, A.D. (2006) Targeting protein-protein interactions by rational design: mimicry of protein surfaces. J. R. Soc. Interface, 3, 215-233.
17. Friedler, A. et al. (2002)Apeptide that binds and stabilizes p53 core domain: chaperone strategy for rescue of oncogenic mutants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 99, 937-942.
18. Halperin, D. and Overmars, M.H. (1994) Spheres, molecules, and hidden surface removal. In Symposium on Computational Geometry, ACM, New York, pp. 113-122.
19. Harris, B.Z. and Lim, W.A. (2001) Mechanism and role of PDZ domains in signaling complex assembly. J. Cell Sci., 114, 3219-3231.
20. Hashemzadeh, M. et al. (2008) Chemical structures and mode of action of intravenous glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockers: a review. Exp. Clin. Cardiol., 13, 192-197.
21. Hayouka, Z. et al. (2010) Mechanism of action of the HIV-1 integrase inhibitory peptide LEDGF 361-370. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 394, 260-265.
22. Kastritis, P.L. and Bonvin, A.M.J.J. (2010) Are scoring functions in protein-protein docking ready to predict interactomes? Clues from a novel binding affinity benchmark. J. Proteome Res., 9, 2216-2225.
23. Laudet, B. et al. (2007) Structure-based design of small peptide inhibitors of protein kinase CK2 subunit interaction. Biochem. J., 408, 363-373.
24. LaValle, S.M. and Kuffner, J.J. (2001) Rapidly-exploring random trees: progress and prospects. In Algorithmic and Computational Robotics: New Directions. Peters, Dartmouth, pp. 293-308.
25. Liu, Z. et al. (2004) Structural mining: self-consistent design on flexible proteinpeptide docking and transferable binding affinity potential. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 126, 8515-8528.
26. Lo Conte, L. et al. (1999) The atomic structure of proteinprotein recognition sites. J. Mol. Biol., 285, 2177-2198.
27. London, N. et al. (2010a) The structural basis of peptide-protein binding strategies. Structure, 18, 188-199.
28. London, N. et al. (2010b) Can self-inhibitory peptides be derived from the interfaces of globular protein-protein interactions? Proteins, 78, 3140-3149.
29. Lovell, S.C. et al. (2003) Structure validation by Cα geometry: Φ, ψ and Cβ deviation. Proteins, 50, 437-450.
30. Mashiach, E. et al. (2010) FiberDock: flexible induced-fit backbone refinement in molecular docking. Proteins, 78, 1503-1519.
31. Mochly-Rosen, D. and Qvit, N. (2010) Peptide inhibitors of protein-protein interactions: from rational design to the clinic. Chim. oggi, 28, 14-16.
32. Monfregola, L. et al. (2009)ASPR strategy for high-throughput ligand screenings based on synthetic peptides mimicking a selected subdomain of the target protein: a proof of concept on HER2 receptor. Bioorg. Med. Chem., 17, 7015-7020.
33. Naider, F. and Anglister, J. (2009) Peptides in the treatment of AIDS. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., 19, 473-482.
34. 10/15/2011
35. Niv, M.Y. and Weinstein, H. (2005) A flexible docking procedure for the exploration of peptide binding selectivity to known structures and homology models of PDZ domains. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 127, 14072-14079.
36. Parthasarathi, L. et al. (2008) Approved drug mimics of short peptide ligands from protein interaction motifs. J. Chem. Inf. Model, 48, 1943-1948.
37. Pettersen, E.F. et al. (2004) UCSF Chimera-a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. Comput. Chem., 25, 1605-1612.
38. Phan, J. et al. (2010) Structure-based design of high affinity peptides inhibiting the interaction of p53 with MDM2 and MDMX. J. Biol. Chem., 285, 2174-2183.
39. Raveh, B. et al. (2009) Rapid sampling of molecular motions with prior information constraints. Plos. Comp. Biol., 5, 2.
40. Raveh, B. et al. (2010) Sub-angstrom modeling of complexes between flexible peptides and globular proteins. Proteins, 78, 2029-2040.
41. Rubinstein, M. and Niv, M.Y. (2009) Peptidic modulators of protein-protein interactions: progress and challenges in computational design. Biopolymers, 91, 505-513.
42. Staneva, I. and Wallin, S. (2009) All-atom Monte Carlo approach to protein-peptide binding. J. Mol. Biol., 393, 1118-1128.
43. Word, J.M. et al. (1999) Asparagine and glutamine: using hydrogen atom contacts in the choice of sidechain amide orientation. Mol. Biol., 285, 1735-1747.
44. Zhang, C. et al. (1999) Protein-protein recognition: exploring the energy funnels near the binding sites. Proteins, 34, 255-267.