Molecular dynamics techniques for modeling G protein-coupled receptors

Current Opinion in Pharmacology

Volumn 30, Issue , 2016, Pages 69-75

  McRobb, Fiona M ^a   Negri, Ana ^a   Beuming, Thijs ^a   Sherman, Woody ^a  

^a SCHRÖDINGER INC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR; DRUG; PROTEIN BINDING;

ANALYTIC METHOD; BINDING AFFINITY; BINDING SITE; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; CRYSTALLIZATION; HUMAN; HYDROPHILICITY; LIGAND BINDING; LIPOPHILICITY; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR MODEL; MUTAGENESIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; OLIGOMERIZATION; POINT MUTATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN DOMAIN; REVIEW; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; CHEMISTRY; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EFFECTS; METABOLISM; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

DRUG DESIGN; HUMANS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATION; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PROTEIN BINDING; RECEPTORS, G-PROTEIN-COUPLED; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

EID: 84979892908     PISSN: 14714892     EISSN: 14714973     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.coph.2016.07.001     Document Type: Review

References (64)

1. 1 Cooke, R.M., Brown, A.J.H., Marshall, F.H., Mason, J.S., Structures of G protein-coupled receptors reveal new opportunities for drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 20 (2015), 1355–1364.
2. 2 Tautermann, C.S., GPCR structures in drug design, emerging opportunities with new structures. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 24 (2014), 4073–4079.
3. 3 Beuming, T., Lenselink, B., Pala, D., McRobb, F., Repasky, M., Sherman, W., Docking and virtual screening strategies for GPCR drug discovery. Filizola, M., (eds.) G Protein-Coupled Receptors in Drug Discovery, 2015, Springer, New York, 251–276.
4. 4 Cavasotto, C.N., Palomba, D., Expanding the horizons of G protein-coupled receptor structure-based ligand discovery and optimization using homology models. Chem Commun 51 (2015), 13576–13594.
5. 5 Ciancetta, A., Sabbadin, D., Federico, S., Spalluto, G., Moro, S., Advances in computational techniques to study GPCR–ligand recognition. Trends Pharmacol Sci 36 (2015), 878–890.
6. 6 Johnston, J.M., Filizola, M., Showcasing modern molecular dynamics simulations of membrane proteins through G protein-coupled receptors. Curr Opin Struct Biol 21 (2011), 552–558.
7. 7• Wang, L., Wu, Y., Deng, Y., Kim, B., Pierce, L., Krilov, G., Lupyan, D., Robinson, S., Dahlgren, M.K., Greenwood, J., et al. Accurate and reliable prediction of relative ligand binding potency in prospective drug discovery by way of a modern free-energy calculation protocol and force field. J Am Chem Soc 137 (2015), 2695–2703 Large-scale validation of free energy perturbation (FEP) in retrospective and prospective projects.
8. 8 Shaw, D.E., Dror, R.O., Salmon, J.K., Grossman, J.P., Mackenzie, K.M., Bank, J.A., Young, C., Deneroff, M.M., Batson, B., Bowers, K.J., et al. Millisecond-scale molecular dynamics simulations on Anton. Proceedings of the Conference on High Performance Computing Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC09), New York, NY, 2009.
9. 9 The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System, Version 1.8. 2015, LLC, Schrödinger.
10. 10 Micheletti, C., Laio, A., Parrinello, M., Reconstructing the density of states by history-dependent metadynamics. Phys Rev Lett, 92, 2004, 170601.
11. 11 Laio, A., Parrinello, M., Escaping free-energy minima. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99 (2002), 12562–12566.
12. 12 Marchi, M., Ballone, P., Adiabatic bias molecular dynamics: a method to navigate the conformational space of complex molecular systems. J Chem Phys 110 (1999), 3697–3702.
13. 13 Schlitter, J., Engels, M., Krüger, P., Targeted molecular dynamics: a new approach for searching pathways of conformational transitions. J Mol Graph 12 (1994), 84–89.
14. 14 Isralewitz, B., Gao, M., Schulten, K., Steered molecular dynamics and mechanical functions of proteins. Curr Opin Struct Biol 11 (2001), 224–230.
15. 15 Hamelberg, D., Mongan, J., McCammon, J.A., Accelerated molecular dynamics: a promising and efficient simulation method for biomolecules. J Chem Phys 120 (2004), 11919–11929.
16. 16 Sugita, Y., Okamoto, Y., Replica-exchange molecular dynamics method for protein folding. Chem Phys Lett 314 (1999), 141–151.
17. 17 Dror, R.O., Arlow, D.H., Maragakis, P., Mildorf, T.J., Pan, A.C., Xu, H., Borhani, D.W., Shaw, D.E., Activation mechanism of the β2-adrenergic receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108 (2011), 18684–18689.
18. 18 Nygaard, R., Zou, Y., Dror, R.O., Mildorf, T.J., Arlow, D.H., Manglik, A., Pan, A.C., Liu, C.W., Fung, J.J., Bokoch, M.P., et al. The dynamic process of β2-adrenergic receptor activation. Cell 152 (2013), 532–542.
19. 19 Kruse, A.C., Hu, J., Pan, A.C., Arlow, D.H., Rosenbaum, D.M., Rosemond, E., Green, H.F., Liu, T., Chae, P.S., Dror, R.O., et al. Structure and dynamics of the M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. Nature 482 (2012), 552–556.
20. 20 Dror, R.O., Green, H.F., Valant, C., Borhani, D.W., Valcourt, J.R., Pan, A.C., Arlow, D.H., Canals, M., Lane, J.R., Rahmani, R., et al. Structural basis for modulation of a G-protein-coupled receptor by allosteric drugs. Nature 503 (2013), 295–299.
21. 21•• Dror, R.O., Pan, A.C., Arlow, D.H., Borhani, D.W., Maragakis, P., Shan, Y., Xu, H., Shaw, D.E., Pathway and mechanism of drug binding to G-protein-coupled receptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108 (2011), 13118–13123 Pioneering study using MD simulations to explore the entry/exit pathway for ligands binding to β adrenergic receptors; identified an extracellular vestibule that is postulated to control the kinetics of binding.
22. 22 Kappel, K., Miao, Y., McCammon, J.A., Accelerated molecular dynamics simulations of ligand binding to a muscarinic G-protein-coupled receptor. Q Rev Biophys 48 (2015), 479–487.
23. 23 González, A., Perez-Acle, T., Pardo, L., Deupi, X., Molecular basis of ligand dissociation in β-adrenergic receptors. PLoS One, 6, 2011, e23815.
24. 24 Guo, D., Pan, A.C., Dror, R.O., Mocking, T., Liu, R., Heitman, L.H., Shaw, D.E., IJzerman, A.P., Molecular basis of ligand dissociation from the adenosine A2A receptor. Mol Pharmacol 89 (2016), 485–491.
25. 25•• Bortolato, A., Deflorian, F., Weiss, D.R., Mason, J.S., Decoding the role of water dynamics in ligand–protein unbinding: CRF 1 R as a test case. J Chem Inf Model 55 (2015), 1857–1866 Computational study ligand–protein unbinding events using a variety of MD methods.
26. 26 Mollica, L., Decherchi, S., Zia, S.R., Gaspari, R., Cavalli, A., Rocchia, W., Kinetics of protein–ligand unbinding via smoothed potential molecular dynamics simulations. Sci Rep, 5, 2015, 11539.
27. 27 Copeland, R.A., Pompliano, D.L., Meek, T.D., Drug–target residence time and its implications for lead optimization. Nat Rev Drug Discov 5 (2006), 730–739.
28. 28 Tummino, P.J., Copeland, R.A., Residence time of receptor–ligand complexes and its effect on biological function. Biochemistry (Mosc) 47 (2008), 5481–5492.
29. 29 Schneider, S., Provasi, D., Filizola, M., The dynamic process of drug–GPCR binding at either orthosteric or allosteric sites evaluated by metadynamics. Filizola, M., (eds.) G Protein-Coupled Receptors in Drug Discovery, 2015, Springer, New York, 277–294.
30. 30• Shang, Y., Yeatman, H.R., Provasi, D., Alt, A., Christopoulos, A., Canals, M., Filizola, M., Proposed mode of binding and action of positive allosteric modulators at opioid receptors. ACS Chem Biol, 2016, 10.1021/acschembio.5b00712 Application of MD simulations to study allosteric modulators binding to opioid receptors.
31. 31 Beuming, T., Che, Y., Abel, R., Kim, B., Shanmugasundaram, V., Sherman, W., Thermodynamic analysis of water molecules at the surface of proteins and applications to binding site prediction and characterization. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinforma 80 (2012), 871–883.
32. 32 Abel, R., Young, T., Farid, R., Berne, B.J., Friesner, R.A., Role of the active-site solvent in the thermodynamics of factor Xa ligand binding. J Am Chem Soc 130 (2008), 2817–2831.
33. 33 Young, T., Abel, R., Kim, B., Berne, B.J., Friesner, R.A., Motifs for molecular recognition exploiting hydrophobic enclosure in protein–ligand binding. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104 (2007), 808–813.
34. 34 Bayden, A.S., Moustakas, D.T., Joseph-McCarthy, D., Lamb, M.L., Evaluating free energies of binding and conservation of crystallographic waters using SZMAP. J Chem Inf Model 55 (2015), 1552–1565.
35. 35 Cui, G., Swails, J.M., Manas, E.S., SPAM: a simple approach for profiling bound water molecules. J Chem Theory Comput 9 (2013), 5539–5549.
36. 36 Baroni, M., Cruciani, G., Sciabola, S., Perruccio, F., Mason, J.S., A common reference framework for analyzing/comparing proteins and ligands. Fingerprints for ligands and proteins (FLAP): theory and application. J Chem Inf Model 47 (2007), 279–294.
37. 37 FLAP/WaterFLAP. 2013, Molecular Discovery Ltd.
38. 38 da Costa, L.M., Hayaki, S., Stoyanov, S.R., Gusarov, S., Tan, X., Gray, M.R., Stryker, J.M., Tykwinski, R., Carneiro, J.W., Sato, H., et al. 3D-RISM-KH molecular theory of solvation and density functional theory investigation of the role of water in the aggregation of model asphaltenes. Phys Chem Chem Phys 14 (2012), 3922–3934.
39. 39 Ross, G.A., Morris, G.M., Biggin, P.C., Rapid and accurate prediction and scoring of water molecules in protein binding sites. PLoS ONE, 7, 2012, e32036.
40. 40 Robinson, D., Bertrand, T., Carry, J.-C., Halley, F., Karlsson, A., Mathieu, M., Minoux, H., Perrin, M.-A., Robert, B., Schio, L., et al. Differential water thermodynamics determine PI3K-Beta/Delta selectivity for solvent-exposed ligand modifications. J Chem Inf Model, 2016, 10.1021/acs.jcim.5b00641.
41. 41 Maestro, Version 10.4. 2015, New York, NY, Schrödinger, LLC.
42. 42 Higgs, C., Beuming, T., Sherman, W., Hydration site thermodynamics explain SARs for triazolylpurines analogues binding to the A2A receptor. ACS Med Chem Lett 1 (2010), 160–164.
43. 43 Knegtel, R.M.A., Robinson, D.D., A role for hydration in interleukin-2 inducible T cell kinase (Itk) selectivity. Mol Inform 30 (2011), 950–959.
44. 44 Lenselink, E.B., Beuming, T., Sherman, W., van Vlijmen, H.W.T., IJzerman, A.P., Selecting an optimal number of binding site waters to improve virtual screening enrichments against the adenosine A 2A receptor. J Chem Inf Model 54 (2014), 1737–1746.
45. 45 Liu, W., Chun, E., Thompson, A.A., Chubukov, P., Xu, F., Katritch, V., Han, G.W., Roth, C.B., Heitman, L.H., IJzerman, A.P., et al. Structural basis for allosteric regulation of GPCRs by sodium ions. Science 337 (2012), 232–236.
46. 46 Mason, J.S., Bortolato, A., Congreve, M., Marshall, F.H., New insights from structural biology into the druggability of G protein-coupled receptors. Trends Pharmacol Sci 33 (2012), 249–260.
47. 47 Mason, J.S., Bortolato, A., Weiss, D.R., Deflorian, F., Tehan, B., Marshall, F.H., High end GPCR design: crafted ligand design and druggability analysis using protein structure, lipophilic hotspots and explicit water networks. Silico Pharmacol, 1, 2013, 23.
48. 48 Goodford, P.J., A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. J Med Chem 28 (1985), 849–857.
49. 49 Sciabola, S., Stanton, R.V., Mills, J.E., Flocco, M.M., Baroni, M., Cruciani, G., Perruccio, F., Mason, J.S., High-throughput virtual screening of proteins using GRID molecular interaction fields. J Chem Inf Model 50 (2010), 155–169.
50. 50 Genheden, S., Ryde, U., The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities. Expert Opin Drug Discov 10 (2015), 449–461.
51. 51 Deng, Y., Roux, B., Computation of binding free energy with molecular dynamics and grand canonical Monte Carlo simulations. J Chem Phys, 128, 2008, 115103.
52. 52 Jorgensen, W.L., Ravimohan, C., Monte Carlo simulation of differences in free energies of hydration. J Chem Phys 83 (1985), 3050–3054.
53. 53 Christ, C.D., Fox, T., Accuracy assessment and automation of free energy calculations for drug design. J Chem Inf Model 54 (2014), 108–120.
54. 54 Shivakumar, D., Harder, E., Damm, W., Friesner, R.A., Sherman, W., Improving the prediction of absolute solvation free energies using the next generation OPLS force field. J Chem Theory Comput 8 (2012), 2553–2558.
55. 55 Harder, E., Damm, W., Maple, J., Wu, C., Reboul, M., Xiang, J.Y., Wang, L., Lupyan, D., Dahlgren, M.K., Knight, J.L., et al. OPLS3: a force field providing broad coverage of drug-like small molecules and proteins. J Chem Theory Comput 12 (2016), 281–296.
56. 56 Wang, J., Wolf, R.M., Caldwell, J.W., Kollman, P.A., Case, D.A., Development and testing of a general amber force field. J Comput Chem 25 (2004), 1157–1174.
57. 57 Vanommeslaeghe, K., Hatcher, E., Acharya, C., Kundu, S., Zhong, S., Shim, J., Darian, E., Guvench, O., Lopes, P., Vorobyov, I., et al. CHARMM general force field: a force field for drug-like molecules compatible with the CHARMM all-atom additive biological force fields. J Comput Chem 31 (2010), 671–690.
58. 58• Goldfeld, D.A., Murphy, R., Kim, B., Wang, L., Beuming, T., Abel, R., Friesner, R.A., Docking and free energy perturbation studies of ligand binding in the kappa opioid receptor. J Phys Chem B 119 (2015), 824–835 Application of free energy perturbation (FEP) to the κ-opioid receptor (KOP).
59. 59 Keränen, H., Gutiérrez-de-Terán, H., Åqvist, J., Structural and energetic effects of A2A adenosine receptor mutations on agonist and antagonist binding. PLOS ONE, 9, 2014, e108492.
60. 2A receptor.
61. 61 Boukharta, L., Gutiérrez-de-Terán, H., Åqvist, J., Computational prediction of alanine scanning and ligand binding energetics in G-protein coupled receptors. PLoS Comput Biol, 10, 2014, e1003585.
62. 62 Hénin, J., Maigret, B., Tarek, M., Escrieut, C., Fourmy, D., Chipot, C., Probing a model of a GPCR/ligand complex in an explicit membrane environment: the human cholecystokinin-1 receptor. Biophys J 90 (2006), 1232–1240.
63. 63 Sherman, W., Day, T., Jacobson, M.P., Friesner, R.A., Farid, R., Novel procedure for modeling ligand/receptor induced fit effects. J Med Chem 49 (2006), 534–553.
64. 64 Clark, A.J., Tiwary, P., Borrelli, K., Feng, S., Miller, E.B., Abel, R., Friesner, R.A., Berne, B.J., Prediction of protein-ligand binding poses via a combination of induced fit docking and metadynamics simulations. J Chem Theory Comput, 2016, 10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00201.