Efficient conformational sampling and weak scoring in docking programs? Strategy of the wisdom of crowds

Journal of Cheminformatics

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Chaput, Ludovic ^a,b,c,d   Mouawad, Liliane ^a,b,c  

^a INSTITUT CURIE   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

^c Centre de Recherche   (France)

^d Selebio SAS   (France)

Author keywords

Benchmark; Docking; DUD E; FlexX; Glide; Gold; Rescoring; Surflex; USC

Indexed keywords

EID: 85020469917     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17582946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13321-017-0227-x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Chen YC (2015) Beware of docking! Trends Pharmacol Sci 36(2):78-95
2. Goodsell DS, Olson AJ (1990) Automated docking of substrates to proteins by simulated annealing. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf 8(3):195-202
3. 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(3):727-748
4. Friesner RA, Banks JL, Murphy RB, Halgren TA, Klicic JJ, Mainz DT et al (2004) Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J Med Chem 47(7):1739-1749
5. Jain AN (2003) Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine. J Med Chem 46:499-511
6. 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
7. Kontoyianni M, McClellan LM, Sokol GS (2004) Evaluation of docking performance: comparative data on docking algorithms. J Med Chem 47(3):558-565
8. Perola E, Walters WP, Charifson PS (2004) A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance. Proteins 56(2):235-249
9. Cummings MD, DesJarlais RL, Gibbs AC, Mohan V, Jaeger EP (2005) Comparison of automated docking programs as virtual screening tools. J Med Chem 48:962-976
10. Chen H, Lyne PD, Giordanetto F, Lovell T, Li J (2006) On evaluating molecular-docking methods for pose prediction and enrichment factors. J Chem Inf Model 46(1):401-415
11. Warren GL, Andrews CW, Capelli A-M, Clarke B, LaLonde J, Lambert MH et al (2006) A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. J Med Chem 49(20):5912-5931
12. Li X, Li Y, Cheng T, Liu Z, Wang R (2010) Evaluation of the performance of four molecular docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes. J Comput Chem 31(11):2109-2125
13. Plewczynski D, Lazniewski M, Augustyniak R, Ginalski K (2011) Can we trust docking results? Evaluation of seven commonly used programs on PDBbind database. J Comput Chem 32(4):742-755
14. Spitzer R, Jain AN (2012) Surflex-Dock: docking benchmarks and real-world application. J Comput Aided Mol Des 26(6):687-699
15. Wei BQ, Weaver LH, Ferrari AM, Matthews BW, Shoichet BK (2004) Testing a flexible-receptor docking algorithm in a model binding site. J Mol Biol 337(5):1161-1182
16. Barril X, Morley SD (2005) Unveiling the full potential of flexible receptor docking using multiple crystallographic structures. J Med Chem 48(13):4432-4443
17. Morris GM, Huey R, Lindstrom W, Sanner MF, Belew RK, Goodsell DS et al (2009) AutoDock4 and AutoDockTools4: automated docking with selective receptor flexibility. J Comput Chem 30(16):2785-2791
18. Sperandio O, Mouawad L, Pinto E, Villoutreix BO, Perahia D, Miteva MA (2010) How to choose relevant multiple receptor conformations for virtual screening: a test case of Cdk2 and normal mode analysis. Eur Biophys J 39(9):1365-1372
19. Cavasotto CN, Abagyan RA (2004) Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases. J Mol Biol 337(1):209-225
20. Cecchini M, Kolb P, Majeux N, Caflisch A (2004) Automated docking of highly flexible ligands by genetic algorithms: a critical assessment. J Comput Chem 25(3):412-422
21. Liebeschuetz JW, Cole JC, Korb O (2012) Pose prediction and virtual screening performance of GOLD scoring functions in a standardized test. J Comput Aided Mol Des 26(6):737-748
22. Huang N, Shoichet BK, Irwin JJ (2006) Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. J Med Chem 49(23):6789-6801
23. Murphy RB, Repasky MP, Greenwood JR, Tubert-Brohman I, Jerome S, Annabhimoju R et al (2016) WScore: a flexible and accurate treatment of explicit water molecules in ligand-receptor docking. J Med Chem 59(9):4364-4384
24. Kellenberger E, Rodrigo J, Muller P, Rognan D (2004) Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy. Proteins 57(2):225-242
25. Wang Z, Sun H, Yao X, Li D, Xu L, Li Y et al (2016) Comprehensive evaluation of ten docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes: the prediction accuracy of sampling power and scoring power. Phys Chem Chem Phys 18(18):12964-12975
26. Chaput L, Martinez-Sanz J, Saettel N, Mouawad L (2016) Benchmark of four popular virtual screening programs: construction of the active/decoy dataset remains a major determinant of measured performance. J Cheminform 8(1):56
27. Mysinger MM, Carchia M, Irwin JJ, Shoichet BK (2012) Directory of useful decoys, enhanced (DUD-E): better ligands and decoys for better benchmarking. J Med Chem 55(14):6582-6594
28. Carugo O (2003) How root-mean-square distance (r.m.s.d.) values depend on the resolution of protein structures that are compared. J Appl Crystallogr 36(1):125-128
29. Halgren TA, Murphy RB, Friesner RA, Beard HS, Frye LL, Pollard WT et al (2004) Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening. J Med Chem 47:1750-1759
30. Jain AN (1996) Scoring noncovalent protein-ligand interactions: a continuous differentiable function tuned to compute binding affinities. J Comput Aided Mol Des 10(5):427-440
31. 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(5):425-445
32. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC (1995) Molecular recognition of receptor sites using a genetic algorithm with a description of desolvation. J Mol Biol 245:43-53
33. Verdonk ML, Berdini V, Hartshorn MJ, Mooij WTM, Murray CW, Taylor RD et al (2004) Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 44(3):793-806
34. Chaput L, Martinez-Sanz J, Quiniou E, Rigolet P, Saettel N, Mouawad L (2016) vSDC: a method to improve early recognition in virtual screening when limited experimental resources are available. J Cheminform 8(1):1
35. Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Hartshorn MJ, Murray CW, Taylor RD (2003) Improved protein-ligand docking using GOLD. Proteins 52(4):609-623
36. Best RB, Zhu X, Shim J, Lopes PE, Mittal J, Feig M et al (2012) Optimization of the additive CHARMM all-atom protein force field targeting improved sampling of the backbone phi, psi and side-chain chi(1) and chi(2) dihedral angles. J Chem Theory Comput 8(9):3257-3273
37. Vanommeslaeghe K, Hatcher E, Acharya C, Kundu S, Zhong S, Shim J et al (2010) 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(4):671-690
38. Surowiecki J (2004) The wisdom of crowds: why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations. Doubleday, New York
39. Friesner RA, Murphy RB, Repasky MP, Frye LL, Greenwood JR, Halgren TA et al (2006) Extra precision glide: docking and scoring incorporating a model of hydrophobic enclosure for protein-ligand complexes. J Med Chem 49:6177-6196
40. Korb O, Stützle T, Exner TE (2009) Empirical scoring functions for advanced protein-ligand docking with PLANTS. J Chem Inf Model 49:84-96
41. Halgren T (2007) New method for fast and accurate binding-site identification and analysis. Chem Biol Drug Des 69(2):146-148
42. Duan J, Dixon SL, Lowrie JF, Sherman W (2010) Analysis and comparison of 2D fingerprints: insights into database screening performance using eight fingerprint methods. J Mol Graph Model 29(2):157-170
43. R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
44. Brooks BR, Bruccoleri RE, Olafson BD, States DJ, Swaminathan S, Karplus M (1983) CHARMM: a program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. J Comput Chem 4:187-217
45. Humphrey W, Dalke A, Schulten K (1996) VMD - visual molecular dynamics. J Mol Graph 14:33-38