Algorithmic challenges in structure-based drug design and NMR structural biology

Frontiers of Electrical and Electronic Engineering in China

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 69-84

  Wang, Lincong ^a   Zou, Shuxue ^a   Wang, Yao ^a  

^a JILIN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Bayesian; chemical shift (CS); degrees of freedom (DOF); Gibbs sampling; inference structure determination (ISD); manifold; Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC); molecular dynamics (MD); Monte Carlo (MC); nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR); nuclear Overhauser effect (NOE); Poisson Boltzmann equation (PBE); probability distribution functions (PDFs); protein ligand docking; residual dipolar couplings (RDCs); root mean square deviation (RMSD); scoring function; simulated annealing (SA); structure based drug design (SBDD); van der Waals (VDW); virtual screening (VC)

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863296319     PISSN: 16733460     EISSN: 16733584     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11460-012-0193-z     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Cavanaugh J, Fairbrother W J, Palmer A G III, Skelton N J. Protein NMR Spectroscopy: Principles and Practice. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1995.
2. Brünger A T. X-PLOR: A System for X-ray Crystallography and NMR. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993.
3. Schwieters C D, Kuszewski J J, Clore G M. Using Xplor-NIH for NMR molecular structure determination. Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, 2006, 48(1): 47-62.
4. Güntert P. Automated NMR structure calculation with CYANA. Methods in Molecular Biology, 2004, 278: 353-378.
5. Rieping W, Habeck M, Nilges M. Inferential structure determination. Science, 2005, 309(5732): 303-306.
6. Crippen G M, Havel T F. Distance Geometry and Molecular Conformations. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1988.
7. Wang L, Kurochkin A V, Zuiderweg E R P. An iterative fitting procedure for the determination of longitudinal NMR cross-correlation rates. Journal of Magnetic Resonance, 2000, 144(1): 175-185.
8. Güntert P, Mumenthaler C, Wüthrich K. Torsion angle dynamics for NMR structure calculation with the new program DYANA. Journal of Molecular Biology, 1997, 273(1): 283-298.
9. Saxe J B. Embeddability of weighted graphs in k-space is strongly NP-hard. In: Proceedings of the 17th Allerton Conference on Communications, Control, and Computing. 1979, 480-489.
10. Berger B, Kleinberg J, Leighton F T. Reconstructing a three-dimensional model with arbitrary errors. Journal of the ACM, 1999, 46(2): 212-235.
11. Wang L, Mettu R, Donald B R. A polynomial-time algorithm for de novo protein backbone structure determination from nuclear magnetic resonance data. Journal of Computational Biology, 2006, 13(7): 1276-1288.
12. Rieping W, Habeck M, Nilges M. Inferential structure determination. Supporting Online Material. Science, 2005, http://www. sciencemag. org/cgi/content/full/309/5732/303/DC1.
13. Habeck M, Nilges M, Rieping W. Bayesian inference applied to macromolecular structure determination. Physical Review E, 2005, 72: 031912.
14. Swendsen R H, Wang J S. Replica Monte Carlo simulation of spin-glasses. Physical Review Letters, 1986, 57(21): 2607-2609.
15. Landau L D, Lifshitz E M. Statistical Physics, Volume 5. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1980.
16. Feller W. An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, Volume II. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1970.
17. Dyer M, Sinclair A, Vigoda E, Weitz D. Mixing in time and space for lattice spin systems: A combinatorial view. Random Structures and Algorithms, 2004, 24(4): 461-479.
18. Wang L, Mettu R, Donald B R. An algebraic geometry approach to backbone structure determination from NMR data. In: Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Bioinformatics Conference. 2005, 235-246.
19. Wang L, Donald B R. Analysis of a systematic search-based algorithm for determining protein backbone structure from a minimal number of residual dipolar couplings. In: Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Bioinformatics Conference. 2004, 319-330.
20. Wang L, Donald B R. Exact solutions for internuclear vectors and backbone dihedral angles from NH residual dipolar couplings in two media, and their application in a systematic search algorithm for determining protein backbone structure. Journal of Biomolecular NMR, 2004, 29(3): 223-242.
21. Wang L, Donald B R. An efficient and accurate algorithm for assigning nuclear Overhauser effect restraints using a rotamer library ensemble and residual dipolar couplings. In: Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Bioinformatics Conference. 2005, 189-202.
22. Wang L, Donald B R. A data-driven, systematic search algorithm for structure determination of denatured or disordered proteins. In: Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Bioinformatics Conference. 2006, 67-78.
23. Hu W, Wang L. Residual dipolar couplings: Measurements and applications to biomolecular studies. Annual Reports on NMR Spectroscopy, 2006, 58: 231-303.
24. Wang L, Mettu R, Lilien R, Donald B R. An exact algorithm for determining protein backbone structure from NH residual dipolar couplings. In: Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Bioinformatics Conference. 2003, 611-612.
25. Kuntz I D, Blaney J M, Oatley S J, Langridge R L, Ferrin T E. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. Journal of Molecular Biology, 1982, 161(2): 269-288.
26. Abagyan R, Totrov M, Kuznetzov D. A new method for protein modeling and design: Applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 1994, 15(5): 488-506.
27. 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. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 1998, 19(14): 1639-1662.
28. Claußen H, Buning C, Rarey M, Lengauer T. FlexE: Efficient molecular docking considering protein structure variations. Journal of molecular biology, 2001, 308(2): 377-395.
29. Jones G, Willett P, Glen R C, Leach A R, Taylor R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. Journal of Molecular Biology, 1997, 267(3): 727-748.
30. McMartin C, Bohacek R S. QXP: Powerful, rapid computer algorithms for structure-based drug design. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 1997, 11(4): 333-344.
31. Jain A N. Surflex: Fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2003, 46(4): 499-511.
32. McGann M R, Almond H R, Nicholls A, Grant J A, Brown F K. Gaussian docking functions. Biopolymers, 2003, 68(1): 76-90.
33. Taylor R D, Jewsbury P J, Essex J W. A review of proteinsmall molecule docking methods. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 2002, 16(3): 151-166.
34. 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 new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2004, 47(7): 1739-1749.
35. Pei J, Wang Q, Liu Z, Li Q, Yang K L, Lai L. PSI-DOCK: Towards highly efficient and accurate flexible ligand docking. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 2006, 62(4): 934-946.
36. Venkatachalam C M, Jiang X, Oldfield T, Waldman M. LigandFit: A novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites. Journal of Molecular Graphics & Modelling, 2003, 21(4): 289-307.
37. Baxter C A, Murray C W, Clark D E, Westhead D R, Eldridge M D. Flexible docking using Tabu search and an empirical estimate of binding affinity. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Genetics, 1998, 33(3): 367-382.
38. Chen H M, Liu B F, Huang H L, Hwang S F, Ho S Y. SODOCK: Swarm optimization for highly flexible proteinligand docking. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 2007, 28(2): 612-623.
39. Korb O, Stützle T, Exner T E. Empirical scoring functions for advanced protein-ligand docking with PLANTS. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 2009, 49(1): 84-96.
40. Totrov M, Abagyan R. Flexible ligand docking to multiple receptor conformations: A practical alternative. Current Opinion in Structural Biology, 2008, 18(2): 178-184.
41. Leach A R, Shoichet B K, Peishoff C E. Prediction of proteinligand interactions. Docking and scoring: Successes and gaps. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2006, 49(20): 5851-5855.
42. Warren G L, Andrews C W, Capelli A M, Clarke B, LaLonde J, Lambert M H, Lindvall M, Nevins N, Semus S F, Senger S, Tedesco G, Wall I D, Woolven J M, Peishoff C E, Head M S. A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2006, 49(20): 5912-5931.
43. Moitessier N, Englebienne P, Lee D, Lawandi J, Corbeil C R. Towards the development of universal, fast and highly accurate docking/scoring methods: A long way to go. British Journal of Pharmacology, 2008, 153(S1): S7-S26.
44. Erickson J A, Jalaie M, Robertson D H, Lewis R A, Vieth M. Lessons in molecular recognition: The effects of ligand and protein flexibility on molecular docking accuracy. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2004, 47(1): 45-55.
45. Cornell W D, Cieplak P, Bayly C I, Gould I R, Merz Jr K M, Ferguson D M, Spellmeyer D C, Fox T, Caldwell J W, Kollman P A. A second generation force field for the simulation of proteins, nucleic acids, and organic molecules. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 1995, 117(19): 5179-5197.
46. Jorgensen W L, Tirado-Rives J. The OPLS potential funtions for proteins. Energy minimizations for crystals of cyclic peptides and crambin. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 1988, 110(6): 1657-1666.
47. Jorgensen W L, Maxwell D S, Tirado-Rives J. Development and testing of the OPLS all-atom force field on conformational energetics and properties of organic liquids. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 1996, 118(45): 11225-11236.
48. Brooks B R, Bruccoleri R E, Olafson B D, States D J, Swaminathan S, Karplus M. CHARMM: A program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 1983, 4(2): 187-217.
49. MacKerell A D, Bashford D, Bellott M, Dunbrack R L, Evanseck J D, Field M J, Fischer S, Gao J, Guo H, Ha S, Joseph-McCarthy D, Kuchnir L, Kuczera K, Lau F T K, Mattos C, Michnick S, Ngo T, Nguyen D T, Prodhom B, Reiher W E, Roux B, Schlenkrich M, Smith J C, Stote R, Straub J, Watanabe M, Wiorkiewicz-Kuczera J, Yin D, Karplus M. All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. Journal of Physical Chemistry B, 1998, 102(18): 3586-3616.
50. Halgren T A. Merck molecular force field. I. Basis, form, scope, parameterization, and performance of MMFF94. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 1996, 17(5-6): 490-519.
51. Landau L D, Lifshitz E M. Quantum Physics, Volume 3. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1980.
52. Kohn W. Electronic structure of matter-wave functions and density functionals. Reviews of Modern Physics, 1999, 71(5): 1253-1266.
53. Kohn W, Meir Y, Makarov D E. van der Waals energies in density functional theory. Physical Review Letters, 1998, 80(19): 4153-4156.
54. Huang K. Statistical Mechanics. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1987.
55. Baxter R J. Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics. London: Academic Press, 1982.
56. Lebowitz J. Statistical mechanics: A selective review of two central issues. Reviews of Modern Physics, 1999, 71(2): 346-357.
57. Istrail S. Statistical mechanics, three-dimensionality and NPcompleteness: I. Universality of intractability of the partition functions of the Ising model across non-planar lattices. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC00). 2000, 87-96.
58. Graves A P, Shivakumar D M, Boyce S E, Jacobson M P, Case D A, Shoichet B K. Rescoring docking hit lists for model cavity sites: Predictions and experimental testing. Journal of Molecular Biology, 2008, 377(3): 914-934.
59. Böhm H J. The computer program LUDI: A new method for the de novo design of enzyme inhibitors. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 1992, 6(1): 61-78.
60. Böhm H J. LUDI: Rule-based automatic design of new substituents for enzyme inhibitor leads. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 1992, 6(6): 593-606.
61. Rarey M, Kramer B, Lengauer T, Klebe G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. Journal of Molecular Biology, 1996, 261(3): 470-489.
62. Krammer A, Kirchhoff P D, Jiang X, Venkatachalam C M, Waldman M. LigScore: A novel scoring function for predicting binding affinities. Journal of Molecular Graphics & Modelling, 2005, 23(5): 395-407.
63. 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. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 1997, 11(5): 425-445.
64. Murray C W, Auton T R, Eldridge M D. Empirical scoring functions. II. The testing of an empirical scoring function for the prediction of ligand-receptor binding affinities and the use of Bayesian regression to improve the quality of the model. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 1998, 12(5): 503-519.
65. Wang R, Liu L, Lai L, Tang Y. A new empirical method for estimating the binding affinity of a protein-ligand complex. Journal of Molecular Modeling, 1998, 4(12): 379-394.
66. Wang R, Lai L, Wang S. Further development and validation of empirical scoring functions for structure-based binding affinity prediction. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 2002, 16(1): 11-26.
67. Halgren T A, Murphy R B, Friesner R A, Beard H S, Frye L L, Pollard W T, Banks J L. Glide: A new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2004, 47(7): 1750-1759.
68. Gohlke H, Hendlich M, Klebe G. Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. Journal of Molecular Biology, 2000, 295(2): 337-356.
69. Velec H F G, Gohlke H, Klebe G. DrugScore(CSD)-knowledge-based scoring function derived from small molecule crystal data with superior recognition rate of nearnative ligand poses and better affinity prediction. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2005, 48(20): 6296-6303.
70. DeWitte R S, Shakhnovich E I. SMoG: de novo design method based on simple, fast, and accurate free energy estimate. 1. Methodology and supporting evidence. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 1996, 118(47): 11733-11744.
71. Muegge I. PMF scoring revisited. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2006, 49(20): 5895-5902.
72. Lovell S C, Word J M, Richardson J S, Richardson D C. The penultimate rotamer library. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Genetics, 2000, 40(3): 389-408.
73. Jones G, Willett P, Glen R C. Molecular recognition of receptor sites using a genetic algorithm with a description of desolvation. Journal of Molecular Biology, 1995, 245(1): 43-53.
74. Dorigo M, Stützle T. Ant Colony Optimization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004.
75. Leach A R, Kuntz I D. Conformational analysis of flexible ligands in macromolecular receptor sites. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 1992, 13(6): 730-748.
76. Ulrich E L, Akutsu H, Doreleijers J F, Harano Y, Ioannidis Y E, Lin J, Livny M, Mading S, Maziuk D, Miller Z, Nakatani E, Schulte C F, Tolmie D E, Kent Wenger R, Yao H, Markley J L. BioMagResBank. Nucleic Acids Research, 2008, 36(suppl 1): D402-D408.
77. Debye P, Hückel E. The theory of electrolytes. I. Lowering of freezing point and related phenomena. Physikalische Zeitschrift, 1923, 24: 185-206.
78. Nicholls A, Honig B. A rapid finite difference algorithm, utilizing successive over-relaxation to solve the Poisson-Boltzmann equation. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 1991, 12(4): 435-445.
79. Holst M, Saied F. Multigrid solution of the Poisson-Boltzmann equation. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 1993, 14(1): 105-113.
80. Kirkwood J G, Poirier J C. The statistical mechanical basis of the Debye-Hüchel theory of strong electrolytes. Journal of Physical Chemistry, 1954, 58(8): 591-596.
81. Chern S S, Chen W, Lam K L. Lectures on Differential Geometry. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co., 1999.