Application of docking-based comparative intermolecular contacts analysis to validate Hsp90α docking studies and subsequent in silico screening for inhibitors

Journal of Molecular Modeling

Volumn 18, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 4843-4863

  Al Sha'er, Mahmoud A ^a   Taha, Mutasem O ^b  

^a ZARQA UNIVERSITY   (Jordan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF JORDAN   (Jordan)

Author keywords

Anticancer; dbCICA; Docking; Heat shock protein 90 ; LigandFit

Indexed keywords

ADENOSINE TRIPHOSPHATASE; AMINO ACID; HEAT SHOCK PROTEIN 90; HEAT SHOCK PROTEIN 90 INHIBITOR;

ARTICLE; BINDING SITE; COMPUTER MODEL; LIGAND BINDING; MOLECULAR DOCKING; PHARMACOPHORE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ADENOSINE TRIPHOSPHATE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BINDING SITES; DRUG DESIGN; HSP90 HEAT-SHOCK PROTEINS; HUMANS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR DOCKING SIMULATION; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 84870477772     PISSN: 16102940     EISSN: 09485023     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00894-012-1479-z     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Mahalingam D, Swords R, Carew JS, Nawrocki ST, Bhalla K, Giles FJ (2009) Targeting HSP90α for cancer therapy. Br J Cancer 100:1523-1529.
2. Chiosis G, Rodina A, Moulick K (2006) Emerging Hsp90α inhibitors: from discovery to clinic. Anti Cancer Agents Med Chem 6:1-8.
3. Dymock BW, Drysdale MJ, McDonald E, Workman P (2004) Inhibitors of Hsp90α and other chaperones for the treatment of cancer. Expert Opin Ther Pat 14:837-847.
4. Isaacs JS, Xu W, Neckers L (2003) Heat shock protein 90 as a molecular target for cancer therapeutics. Cancer Cell 3:213-217.
5. Pearl LH, Prodromou C, Workman P (2008) The Hsp90α molecular chaperone: an open and shut case for treatment. Biochem J 41:439-453.
6. Neckers L, Schulte TW, Mimnaugh E (1999) Geldanamycin as a potential anti-cancer agent: its molecular target and biochemical activity. Invest New Drugs 17:361-373.
7. Soga S, Shiotsu Y, Akinaga S, Sharma SV (2003) Development of radicicol analogues. Curr Cancer Drug Targets 3:359-369.
8. Chiosis G, Kang Y, Sun W (2008) Discovery and development of purine scaffold Hsp90α inhibitors. Expert Opin Drug Discov 3:99-114.
9. Hwangseo P, Yun-Jung K, Ji-Sook H (2007) A novel class of Hsp90α inhibitors isolated by structure-based virtual screening. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 17:6345-6349.
10. Barril X, Beswick M, Collier A, Drysdale M, Dymock B, Fink A, Grant K, Howes R, Jordan A, Massey A (2006) 4-Amino derivatives of the Hsp90α inhibitor CCT018159. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 16:2543-2548.
11. Barril X, Brough P, Drysdale M, Hubbard RE, Massey A, Surgenor A, Wright L (2005) Structure-based discovery of a new class of Hsp90α inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 15:5187-5191.
12. Chiosis G, Lucas B, Shtil A, Huezoa H, Rosen N (2002) Development of a purine-scaffold novel vlass of Hsp90α binders that inhibit the proliferation of cancer cells and induce the degradation of Her2tyrosine kinase. Bioorg Med Chem 10:3555-3564.
13. Neckers L (2006) Using natural product inhibitors to validate Hsp90α as a molecular target in cancer. Curr Top Med Chem 6:1163-1171.
14. Xiao L, Lu X, Ruden DM (2006) Effectiveness of Hsp90α inhibitors as anti-cancer drugs. Mini-Rev Med Chem 6:1137-1143.
15. Neckers L, Mollapour M, Tsutsumi S (2009) The complex dance of the molecular chaperone Hsp90. Trends Biochem Sci 34:223-226.
16. Jeffrey RH, Chang P, Andrew MP, Aaron RK, Michael DW, Xilu W, Christopher LL, Jamey CM, Kerry MS, Russell AJ, Jun C, Paul LR, Sha J, Stephen KT, Edward DM, Sarah AD, Uri SL, Jean MS, Karl AW, Diane MB, Stephen WF, Steven WE, Philip JH (2007) Discovery and design of novel HSP90Α inhibitors using multiple fragment-based design strategies. Chem Biol Drug 70:1-12.
17. Taha MO, Habash M, Al-Hadidi Z, Al-Bakri A, Younis K, Sisan S (2011) Docking-based comparative intermolecular contacts analysis as new 3-D QSAR concept for validating docking studies and in silico screening: NMTand GP inhibitors as case studies. J Chem Inf Model 51:647-669.
18. Morris GM, Olson AJ, Goodsell DS (2000) Protein-ligand docking methods. Princ Med Chem 8:31-48.
19. Kontoyianni M, McClellan LM, Sokol GS (2004) Evaluation of docking performance: comparative data on docking algorithms. J Med Chem 47:558-565.
20. Beier C, Zacharias M (2010) Tackling the challenges posed by target flexibility in drug design. Expert Opin Drug Dis 5:347-359.
21. Boyd S (2007) FlexX suite. Chem World UK 4:72.
22. Rarey M, Kramer B, Lengauer T, Klebe G (1996) A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J Mol Biol 261:470-489.
23. Ewing TJA, Makino S, Skillman AG, Kuntz ID (2001) DOCK 4.0: search strategies for automated molecular docking of flexible molecule databases. J Comput Aid Mol Des 15:411-428.
24. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC, Leach AR, Taylor R (1997) Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J Mol Biol 267:727-748.
25. Vaque M, Ardrevol A, Blade C, Salvado MJ, Blay M, Fernandez- Larrea J, Arola L, Pujadas G (2008) Protein-ligand docking: a review of recent advances and future perspectives. Curr Pharm Anal 4:1-19.
26. Cosconati S, Forli S, Perryman AL, Harris R, Goodsell DS, Olson AJ (2010) Virtual screening with AutoDock: theory and practice. Expert Opin Drug Dis 5:597-607.
27. Morris GM, Goodsell DS, Halliday RS, Huey R, Hart WE, Belew RK, Olson AJ (1998) Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. J Comput Chem 19:1639-1662.
28. Halgren TA, Murphy RB, Friesner RA, Beard HS, Frye LL, Pollard WT, Banks JL (2004) Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening. J Med Chem 47:1750-1759.
29. Accelrys Inc. (2000) Cerius2 LigandFit 4.10. Accelrys Inc., San Diego.
30. Diller DJ, Merz KM (2001) High throughput docking for library design and library prioritization. Proteins 43:113-124.
31. Hecht D, Fogel GB (2009) Computational intelligence methods for docking scores. Curr Comput Aid Drug 5:56-68.
32. Bissantz C, Folkers G, Rognan D (2000) Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. 1. Evaluation of different docking/scoring combinations. J Med Chem 43:4759-4767.
33. Gao WR, Lai YL (1998) SCORE: a new empirical method for estimating the binding affinity of a protein-ligand complex. J Mol Model 4:379-394.
34. Krammer A, Kirchhoff PD, Jiang X, Venkatachalam CM, Waldman M (2005) LigScore: a novel scoring function for predicting binding affinities. J Mol Graph Model 23:395-407.
35. Velec HFG, Gohlke H, Klebe G (2005) Drug score-knowledgebased scoring function derived from small molecule crystal data with superior recognition rate of near-native ligand poses and better affinity prediction. J Med Chem 48:6296-6303.
36. Jain AN (2006) Scoring functions for protein-ligand docking. Curr Protein Pept Sci 7:407-420.
37. Rajamani R, Good AC (2007) Ranking poses in structure-based lead discovery and optimization: current trends in scoring function development. Curr Opin Drug Disc 10:308-315.
38. Krovat EM, Langer T (2004) Impact of scoring functions on enrichment in docking- based virtual screening: an application study on renin inhibitors. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 44:1123-1129.
39. Foloppe N, Hubbard R (2006) Towards predictive ligand design with free-energy based computational methods? Curr Med Chem 13:3583-3608.
40. Englebienne P, Moitessier N (2009) Docking ligands into flexible and solvated macromolecules. Are popular scoring functions accurate for this class of proteins? J Chem Inf Model 49:1568-1580.
41. Jain AN (1996) Scoring non-covalent protein-ligand interactions: a continuous differentiable function tuned to compute binding affinities. J Comput Aided Mol Des 10:427-440.
42. Böhm HJ (1998) Prediction of binding constants of protein ligands: a fast method for the prioritization of hits obtained from de novo design or 3D database search programs. J Comput Aided Mol Des 12:309-323.
43. Eldridge MD, Murray CW, Auton TR, Paolini GV, Mee RP (1997) 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 11:425-445.
44. Wang R, Gao Y, Lai L (1998) SCORE: a new empirical method for estimating the binding affinity of a protein-ligand complex. J Mol Model 4:379-394.
45. Gehlhaar DK, Bouzida D, Rejto P (1999) Reduced dimensionality in ligand-protein structure prediction: covalent inhibitors of serine proteases and design of site-directed combinatorial libraries. In: Parrill L, Rami Reddy M (eds) Rational drug design: novel methodology and practical applications. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp 292-311.
46. Wang R, Lai L, Wang S (2002) Further development and of empirical scoring functions for structure-based binding validation affinity prediction. J Comput Aided Mol Des 16:11-26.
47. Muegge I, Martin YC (1999) A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. J Med Chem 42:791-804.
48. Muegge I (2000) A knowledge-based scoring function for protein- ligand interactions: probing the reference state. Perspect Drug Discov 20:99-114.
49. Muegge I (2001) Effect of ligand volume correction on PMF scoring. J Comput Chem 22:418-425.
50. Gohlke H, Hendlich M, Klebe G (2000) Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol 295:337-356.
51. Muegge I (2006) PMF scoring revisited. J Med Chem 49:5895- 5902.
52. Song CM, Lim SJ, Tong JC (2009) Recent advances in computeraided drug design. Brief Bioinform 10:579-591.
53. Jorgensen WL (2009) Efficient drug lead discovery and optimization. Acc Chem Res 42:724-733.
54. Leach AR, Shoichet BK, Peishoff CE (2006) Prediction of protein- ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: successes and gaps. J Med Chem 49:5851-5855.
55. Klebe G (2006) Virtual ligand screening: strategies, perspectives and limitations. Drug Discov Today 11:580-594.
56. Krissinel E (2009) Crystal contacts as nature's docking solutions. J Comput Chem 31:133-143.
57. Steinbrecher T, Labahn A (2010) Towards accurate free energy calculations in ligand protein-binding studies. Curr Med Chem 17:767-785.
58. Taha MO, AlDhamin M (2005) Effects of variable docking conditions and scoring functions on the qualities of protein aligned CoMFA models constructed from diverse h-PTP 1B inhibitors. J Med Chem 48:8016-8034.
59. Tame JRH (1999) Scoring functions: a view from the bench. J Comput Aided Mol Des 13:99-108.
60. Kollman P (1993) Free energy calculations: applications to chemical and biochemical phenomena. Chem Rev 93:2395-2417.
61. Homans SW (2007) Water, water everywhere-except where it matters. Drug Discov Today 12:534-539.
62. Poornima CS, Dean PM (1995) Hydration in drug design. 1.Multiple hydrogen-bonding features of water molecules in mediating protein- ligand interactions. J Comput Aided Mol Des 9:500-512.
63. Poornima CS, Dean PM (1995) Hydration in drug design. 2. Influence of local site surface shape on water binding. J Comput Aided Mol Des 9:513-520.
64. Poornima CS, Dean PM (1995) Hydration in drug design. 3. Conserved water molecules at the ligand-binding sites of homologous proteins. J Comput Aided Mol Des 9:521-531.
65. Koehler KF, Rao SN, Snyder JP (1996) Modeling drug-receptor interactions. In: Cohen NC (ed) Guidebook on molecular modeling in drug design. Academic, San Diego, pp 235-336.
66. Pastor M, Cruciani G, Watson K (1997) A strategy for the incorporation of water molecules present in a ligand binding site into a three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis. J Med Chem 40:4089-4102.
67. Silverman RA (1991) The organic chemistry of drug design and drug action. Academic, San Diego, pp 62-65.
68. Waszkowycz B (1998) New methods for structure-based de novo drug design. In: Harvey AL (ed) Advances in drug discovery techniques. Wiley, Chichester, pp 150-153.
69. Sutherland JJ, Nandigam RK, Erickson JA, Vieth M (2007) Lessons in molecular recognition. 2. Assessing and improving crossdocking accuracy. J Chem Inf Model 47:2293-2302.
70. Verdonk ML, Berdini V, Hartshorn MJ, Mooij WTM, Murray CW, Watson P (2004) Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 44:793-806.
71. Wang R, Lu Y, Wang S (2003) Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J Med Chem 46:2287-2303.
72. Abu-Hammad AM, Afifi F, Taha MO (2007) Combining docking, scoring and molecular field analyses to probe influenza neuraminidase- ligand interactions. J Mol Graph Model 26:443-456.
73. Abu-Hammad A, Zalloum WA, Zalloum H, Abu-Sheikha G, Taha MO (2009) Homology modeling of MCH1 receptor and validation by docking/scoring and protein-aligned CoMFA. Eur J Med Chem 44:2583-2596.
74. Venkatachalam CM, Jiang X, Oldfield T, Waldman M (2003) LigandFit: a novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites. J Mol Graph Model 21:289-307.
75. Brough PA, Aherne W, Barril X, Borgognoni J, Boxall K, Cansfield JE, Cheung K-MJ et al (2008) 4, 5-Diarylisoxazole Hsp90α chaperone inhibitors: potential therapeutic agents for the treatment of cancer. J Med Chem 51:196-218.
76. McDonald E, Jones K, Brough PA, Drysdale MJ, Workman P (2006) Discovery and development of pyrazole-scaffold Hsp90α inhibitors. Curr Top Med Chem 6:1193-1203.
77. Gopalsamy A, Shi M, Golas J, Vogan E, Jacob J, Johnson M, Lee F, Nilakantan R, Petersen R, Svenson K, Chopra R, Tam MS, Wen Y, Ellingboe J, Arndt K, Boschelli F (2008) Discovery of benzisoxazoles as potent inhibitors of chaperone heat shock protein 90. J Med Chem 51:373-375.
78. Gasteiger J, Marsili M (1980) Iterative partial equalization of orbital electronegativity-a rapid access to atomic charges. Tetrahedron 36:3219-3228.
79. Gehlhaar DK, Verkhivker GM, Rejto PA, Sherman CJ, Fogel DB, Fogel LJ, Freer ST (1995) Molecular recognition of the inhibitor AG-1343 by HIV-1 protease: conformationally flexible docking by evolutionary programming. Chem Biol 2:317-324.
80. Accelrys Inc. (2009) Discovery Studio 2.5. Accelrys Inc., San Diego.
81. Taha MO, Al-Bakri AG, Zalloum WA (2006) Discovery of potent inhibitors of pseudomonal quorum sensing via pharmacophore modeling and in silico screening. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 16:5902-5906.
82. Taha MO, Bustanji Y, Al-Bakri AG, Al-Motassem Y, Zalloum WA, Al-Masri IM, Atallah N (2007) Discovery of new potent human protein tyrosine phosphatase inhibitors via pharmacophore and QSAR analysis followed by in silico screening. J Mol Graph Model 25:870-884.
83. Avila C, Hadden MK, Ma Z, Kornilayev BA, Ye QZ, Blagg BS (2006) Highthroughput screening for Hsp90α ATPase inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 16:3005-3008.
84. Lanzetta PA, Alvarez LJ, Reinach PS, Candia OA (1979) An improved assay for nanomole amounts of inorganic phosphate. Anal Biochem 100:95-97.
85. Christopher A, Boris AK, Brian SJ (2006) Development and optimization of a useful assay for determining Hsp90s inherent ATPase activity. Bioorg Med Chem 14:1134-1142.
86. Abu Sheikha G, Al-Sha'er MA, Taha MO (2011) Some sulfonamide drugs inhibit ATPase activity of heat shock protein 90: investigation by docking simulation and experimental validation. J Enzym Inhibit Med Chem 26:603-609.
87. Al-Sha'er MA, Taha MO (2010) Elaborate ligand-based modeling reveal new nanomolar heat shock protein 90a inhibitors. J Chem Inf Model 50:1706-1723.
88. Al-masri IM, Mohammad MK, Taha MO (2008) Discovery of DPP IV inhibitors by pharmacophore modeling and QSAR analysis followed by in silico screening. Chem Med Chem 3:1763-1779.
89. Al-Sha'er MA, Taha MO (2010) Discovery of novel CDK1 inhibitors by combining pharmacophore modeling, QSAR analysis and in silico screening followed by in vitro bioassay. Eur J Med Chem 45:4316-4330.
90. Irwin JJ, Shoichet BK (2005) ZINC-a free database of commercially available compounds for virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model 45:177-182.
91. Kirchmair J, Markt P, Distinto S, Wolber G, Langer T (2008) Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection. What can we learn from earliermistakes? J Comput Aided Mol Des 22:213-228.
92. Jacobsson M, Liden P, Stjernschantz E, Bostroem H, Norinder U (2003) Improving structure-based virtual screening by multivariate analysis of scoring data. J Med Chem 46:5781-5789.
93. Triballeau N, Acher F, Brabet I, Pin JP, Bertrand HO (2005) Virtual screening workflow development guided by the "receiver operating characteristic" curve approach. Application to high-throughput docking on metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype. J Med Chem 48:2534-2547.
94. Lipinski CA (2004) Lead- and drug-like compounds: the rule-offive revolution. Drug Discov Today Technol 1:337-341.
95. Howes R, Barril X, Dymock BW, Grant K, NorthWeld CJ, Robertson AGS, Surgenor A, Wayne J, Wright L, James K, Matthews T, Cheung KM, McDonald E, Workman P, Drysdale MJ (2006) A fluorescence polarization assay for inhibitors of Hsp90. Anal Biochem 350:202-213.