Specificity quantification of biomolecular recognition and its implication for drug discovery

Scientific Reports

Volumn 2, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Yan, Zhiqiang ^a   Wang, Jin ^a,b  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CHANGCHUN INSTITUTE OF APPLIED CHEMISTRY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BINDING SITE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; VALIDATION STUDY;

BINDING SITES; DRUG DISCOVERY; MODELS, MOLECULAR;

EID: 84859783507     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep00309     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Koshland Jr, D. E. Application of a theory of enzyme specificity to protein synthesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 44, 98-104 (1958).
2. McCammon, J. A. Theory of biomolecular recognition. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 8, 245-249 (1998). (Pubitemid 28221058)
3. Cohen, N. C. Guidebook on molecular modeling in drug design. Academic Press pages 1-361 (1996).
4. Warren, G. L. et al. Computational and Structural Approaches to Drug Discovery: Ligand-Protein Interactions. RSC Publishing (2008).
5. Gregory, L. et al. A Critical Assessment of Docking Programs and Scoring Functions. J. Med. Chem. 49, 5912-5931 (2006).
6. Kim, R. & Skolnick, J. Assessment of programs for ligand binding affinity prediction. J. Comput. Chem. 29, 1316-31. (2008) (Pubitemid 351594477)
7. Kitchen, D. B., Decornez, H., Furr, J. R. & Bajorath, J. Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applicaitons. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 935-949 (2004). (Pubitemid 39529931)
8. Janin, J. Principles of protein-protein recognition from structure to thermodynamics. Biochimie 77, 497-505 (1995).
9. Havranek, J. J. & Harbury, P. B. Automated design of specificity in molecular recognition. Nat. Struct. Biol. 10, 45-52 (2003). (Pubitemid 36034176)
10. Kortemme, T. et al. Computational redesign of protein-protein interaction specificity. Nat. Struct. Biol. 11, 371-379 (2004). (Pubitemid 38436803)
11. Bolon, D. N., Grant, R. A., Baker, T. A. & Sauer, R. T. Specificity versus stability in computational protein design. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102, 12724-12729 (2005). (Pubitemid 41279433)
12. Huang, S. Y., Grinter, S. Z. & Zou, X. Q. Scoring functions and their evaluation methods for protein-ligand docking: recent advances and future directions. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 12, 12899-12908 (2010).
13. Wang, J. & Verkhivker, G. M. Energy landscape theory, funnels, specificity, and optimal criterion of biomolecular binding. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 188101-188104 (2003).
14. Wang, J. et al. Quantifying intrinsic specificity: A potential complement to affinity in drug screening. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 198101-198104 (2007).
15. Shan, Y. et al. How does a drug molecule find its target binding site? J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133, 9181-9183 (2011).
16. Bryngelson, J. D. & Wolynes, P. G. Spin-glasses and the statistical-mechanics of protein folding. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84, 7524-7528 (1987).
17. Bryngelson, J. D., Onuchic, J. N., Socci, N. D. & Wolynes, P. G. Funnels, pathways, and the energy landscape of protein folding: a synthesis. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 21, 167-195 (1995).
18. Janin, J. Quantifying biological specificity: the statistical mechanics of molecular recognition. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 25, 438-445 (1996). (Pubitemid 26277721)
19. Rejto, P. A. & Verkhivker, G. M. Unraveling principles of lead discovery: From unfrustrated energy landscapes to novel molecular anchors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93, 8945-8950 (1996). (Pubitemid 26281997)
20. Tsai, C. J., Kumar, S., Ma, B. & Nussinov. R. Folding funnels, binding funnels, and protein function. Protein Sci. 8, 1181-1190 (1999). (Pubitemid 29264948)
21. Dominy, B. N. & Shakhnovich, E. I. Native atom types for knowledge-based potential: Applications to binding energy prediction. J. Med. Chem. 47, 4838-4558 (2004).
22. Liu, Z., Dominy, B. N. & Shakhnovich, E. I. Structural mining: Self-consistent design on flexible protein-peptide docking and transferable binding affinity potential. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126, 8515-8528 (2004). (Pubitemid 38917975)
23. Levy, Y., Wolynes, P. G. & Onuchic, P. G. Protein topology determines binding mechanism. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 511-516 (2004). (Pubitemid 38084667)
24. Cheng, T. J., Li, X., Li, Y., Liu, Z. H. & Wang, R. X. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 49, 1079-1093 (2009).
25. Wang, J., Kang, K., Kuntz, I. D. & Kollman, P. A. Hierarchical database screenings for HIV-1 reverse transcriptase using a pharmacophore model, rigid docking, solvation docking, and MM-PB/SA. J. Med. Chem. 48, 2432-2444 (2005). (Pubitemid 40516435)
26. Thomas, P. D. & Dill, K. A. An iterative method for extracting energy-like quantities from protein structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93, 11628-11633 (1996). (Pubitemid 26347173)
27. Zhou, H. & Zhou, Y. Distance-scaled, finite ideal-gas reference state improves structure-derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction. Protein Sci. 11, 2714-2726 (2002). (Pubitemid 35191145)
28. Huang, S. Y. & Zou, X. An Iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict proteinligand interactions: I. Derivation of interaction potentials. J. Comput. Chem. 27, 1866-1875 (2006). (Pubitemid 44672568)
29. Wang, R., Fang, X., Lu, S. & Wang, Y. The pdbbind database: Collection of binding affinities for protein-ligand complexes with known three-dimensional structures. J. Med. Chem. 47, 2977-2980 (2004). (Pubitemid 38702694)
30. Shoichet, B. K. Virtual screening of chemical libraries. Nature 432, 862-865 (2004). (Pubitemid 40037142)
31. Wu, Y., Lu, M., Chen, M. Li, J. & Ma, J. OPUS-Ca: A knowledge-based potential function requiring study only Ca positions. Protein Sci. 16, 1449-1463 (2007). (Pubitemid 46984879)
32. Sippl, M. J. Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mean force. an approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 213, 859-883 (1990). (Pubitemid 20213222)
33. PDBbind Database website: http://www. pdbbind-cn. org/
34. Clark, M., Cramer III, R. D. & Opdenbosch, N. V. Validation of the general purpose tripos 5. 2 force field. J. Comput. Chem. 10, 982-1012 (1989).
35. Guha, T. et al. The blue obelisk-interoperability in chemical informatics. J. Chem. Inf. Model 46, 991-998 (2006).
36. Morris, G. M. et al. Automated docking using a lamarckian genetic algorithm and and empirical binding free energy function. J. Comput. Chem. 19, 1639-1662 (1998). (Pubitemid 128590223)
37. Leonid, A. M. & Shakhnovich, E. I. How to derive a protein folding potential? A new approach to an old problem. J. Mol. Biol. 264, 1164-1179 (1996). (Pubitemid 27019500)
38. Koretke, K. K., Luthey-Schulten, Z. & Wolynes, P. G. Self-consistently optimized energy functions for protein structure prediction by molecular dynamics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95, 2932-2937 (1998). (Pubitemid 28135832)
39. Fujitsuka, Y., Takada, S., Luthey-Schulten, Z. A. & Wolynes, P. G. Optimizing physical energy functions for protein folding. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 54, 88-103 (2004). (Pubitemid 38036917)
40. NCI Website: http://dtp. nci. nih. gov/branches/dscb/diversity- explanation. html.
41. Kurumbail, R. G. et al. Structural basis for selective inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 by anti-inflammatory agents. Nature 384, 644-648 (1996).
42. Dewitt, D. L. Cox-2-selective inhibitors: The new super aspirins. Mol. Pharmacol. 55, 625-631 (1999).
43. Wei, D., Zheng, H., Su, N., Deng, M. & Lai, L. Binding energy landscape analysis helps to discriminate true hits from high-scoring decoys in virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 50, 1855-1864 (2010).
44. Kirchmair, J., Markt, P., Distinto, S., Wolber, G. & Langer, T. Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection-what can we learn from earlier mistakes. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 22, 213-228 (2008). (Pubitemid 351447959)