We previously developed the direct interaction approximation (DIA) method to estimate the protein-ligand binding free energy (DG). The DIA method estimates the DG value based on the direct van der Waals and electrostatic interaction energies between the protein and the ligand. In the current study, the effect of the entropy of the ligand was introduced with protein dynamic properties by molecular dynamics simulations, and the interaction between each residue of the protein and the ligand was also weighted considering the hydration of each residue. The molecular dynamics simulation of the apo target protein gave the hydration effect of each residue, under the assumption that the residues, which strongly bind the water molecules, are important in the protein-ligand binding. These two effects improved the reliability of the DIA method. In fact, the parameters used in the DIA became independent of the target protein. The averaged error of DG estimation was 1.3 kcal/mol and the correlation coefficient between the experimental DG value and the calculated DG value was 0.75.
References
[1]
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.; et al. A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 5912–5931, doi:10.1021/jm050362n.
[2]
Kontoyianni, M.; Sokol, G.S.; McClellan, L.M. Evaluation of library ranking efficacy in virtual screening. J. Comput. Chem. 2005, 26, 11–22, doi:10.1002/jcc.20141.
[3]
Kuntz, I.D.; Blaney, J.M.; Oatley, S.J.; Langridge, R.; Ferrin, T.E. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 1982, 161, 269–288, doi:10.1016/0022-2836(82)90153-X.
[4]
Rarey, M.; Kramer, B.; Lengauer, T.; Klebe, G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J. Mol. Biol. 1996, 261, 470–489, doi:10.1006/jmbi.1996.0477.
[5]
Jones, G.; Willet, P.; Glen, R.C.; Leach, A.R.; Taylor, R. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J. Mol. Biol. 1997, 267, 727–748, doi:10.1006/jmbi.1996.0897.
[6]
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 1998, 33, 367–382, doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0134(19981115)33:3<367::AID-PROT6>3.0.CO;2-W.
[7]
Fukunishi, Y.; Mikami, Y.; Nakamura, H. Similarities among receptor pockets and among compounds: Analysis and application to in silico ligand screening. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2005, 24, 34–45, doi:10.1016/j.jmgm.2005.04.004.
[8]
Zhang, C.; Liu, S.; Zhu, Q.; Zhou, Y. A knowledge-based energy function for protein-ligand, protein–protein, and protein-DNA complexes. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 2325–2335, doi:10.1021/jm049314d.
[9]
Muegge, I.; Martin, Y.C. A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: A simplified potential approach. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 791–804, doi:10.1021/jm980536j.
[10]
Fukunishi, Y.; Mikami, Y.; Kubota, S.; Nakamura, H. Multiple target screening method for robust and accurate in silico ligand screening. J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 2005, 25, 61–70.
[11]
Shan, Y.; Kim, T.E.; Eastwood, M.P.; Dror, R.O.; Seeliger, M.A.; Shaw, D.E. How does a drug molecule find its target binding site? J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 9181–9183.
[12]
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. Soc. USA 2011, 108, 13118–13123, doi:10.1073/pnas.1104614108.
[13]
Kamiya, N.; Yonezawa, Y.; Nakamura, H.; Higo, J. Protein-inhibitor flexible docking by a multicanonical sampling: Native complex structure with the lowest free energy and a free-energy barrier distinguishing the native complex from the others. Proteins 2008, 70, 41–53.
[14]
Nakajima, N.; Higo, J.; Kidera, A.; Nakamura, H. Flexible docking of a ligand peptide to a receptor protein by multicanonical molecular dynamics simulation. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1997, 278, 297–301, doi:10.1016/S0009-2614(97)01074-9.
[15]
Fukunishi, Y.; Mikami, Y.; Nakamura, H. The filling potential method: A method for estimating the free energy surface for protein-ligand docking. J. Phys. Chem. B 2003, 107, 13201–13210, doi:10.1021/jp035478e.
[16]
Gervasio, F.L.; Laio, A.; Parrinello, M. Flexible docking in solution using metadynamics. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 2600–2607, doi:10.1021/ja0445950.
[17]
Branduardi, D.; Gervasio, F.L.; Parrinello, M. From A to B in free energy space. J. Chem. Phys. 2007, 126, 054103, doi:10.1063/1.2432340.
[18]
Fujitani, H.; Tanida, Y.; Matsuura, A. Massively parallel computation of absolute binding free energy with well-equilibrated states. Phys. Rev. E 2009, 79, 021914, doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.79.021914.
[19]
Fukunishi, Y.; Mitomo, D.; Nakamura, H. Protein-ligand binding free energy calculation by the smooth reaction path generation SRPG method. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2009, 49, 1944–1951, doi:10.1021/ci9002156.
[20]
Liphardt, J.; Dumont, S.; Smith, S.B.; Tinoco, I., Jr.; Bustamante, C. Equilibrium information from nonequilibrium measurements in an experimental test of Jarzynski’s equality. Science 2002, 296, 1832–1835, doi:10.1126/science.1071152.
[21]
Kollman, P.A.; Massova, I.; Reyes, C.; Kuhn, B.; Huo, S.; Chong, L.; Lee, M.; Lee, T.; Duan, Y.; Wang, W.; et al. Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: Combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. Acc. Chem. Res. 2000, 33, 889–897, doi:10.1021/ar000033j.
[22]
Hansson, T.; Marelius, J.; ？qvist, J. Ligand binding affinity prediction by linear interaction energy methods. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 1998, 12, 27–35, doi:10.1023/A:1007930623000.
[23]
Pisabarro, T.M.; Gago, F.; Wade, R.C. Prediction of drug binding affinities by comparative binding energy analysis. J. Med. Chem. 1995, 38, 2681–2691, doi:10.1021/jm00014a020.
[24]
Cuevas, C.; Pastor, M.; Perez, C.; Gago, F. Comparative binding energy (COMBINE) analysis of human neutrophil elastase inhibition by pyridone-containing trifluoromethylketones. Comb. Chem. High. Throughput Screen 2001, 4, 627–642, doi:10.2174/1386207013330742.
[25]
Pastor, M.; Ortiz, A.R.; Gago, F. Comparative binding energy analysis of HIV-1 protease inhibitors: incorporation of solvent effects and validation as a powerful tool in receptor-based drug design. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41, 836–852, doi:10.1021/jm970535b.
[26]
Lozano, J.J.; Pastor, M.; Cruciani, G.; Gaedt, K.; Centeno, N.B.; Gago, F.; Sanz, F. 3D-QSAR methods on the basis of ligand-receptor complexes. Application of COMBINE and GRID/GOLPE methodologies to a series of CYP1A2 ligands. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2000, 14, 341–353, doi:10.1023/A:1008164621650.
[27]
Tomic, S.; Nilsson, L.; Wade, R.C. Nuclear receptor—DNA binding specificity: A COMBINE and Free-Wilson QSAR analysis. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 1780–1792, doi:10.1021/jm9911175.
[28]
Wang, T.; Wade, R.C. Comparative binding energy (COMBINE) analysis of influenza neuraminidase-inhibitor complexes. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 961–971, doi:10.1021/jm001070j.
[29]
Murcia, M.; Ortiz, A.R. Virtual screening with flexible docking and COMBINE-based models. Application to a series of factor Xa inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 47, 805–820, doi:10.1021/jm030137a.
[30]
Fukunishi, Y.; Nakamura, H. Statistical estimation of the protein-ligand binding free energy based on direct protein-ligand interaction obtained by molecular dynamics simulation. Pharmaceuticals 2012, 5, 1064–1079, doi:10.3390/ph5101064.
[31]
Abel, R.; Young, T.; Farid, R.; Beme, B.J.; Friesner, R.A. Role of the active-site solvent in the thermodynamics of factor Xa ligand binding. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 2817–2831, doi:10.1021/ja0771033.
[32]
Repasky, M.P.; Murphy, R.B.; Banks, J.L.; Greenwood, J.R.; Tubert-brohman, I.; Bhat, S.; Friesner, R.A. Docking performance of the glide program as evaluated on the Astex and DUD database: A complete set of glide SP results and selected results for a new scoring function integrating WaterMap and glide. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2012, 26, 787–799, doi:10.1007/s10822-012-9575-9.
[33]
Case, D.A.; Darden, T.A.; Cheatham, T.E., III; Simmerling, C.L.; Wang, J.; Duke, R.E.; Luo, R.; Merz, K.M.; Wang, B.; Pearlman, D.A.; et al. AMBER 8, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2004.
[34]
Wang, J.; Wolf, R.M.; Caldwell, J.W.; Kollman, P.A.; Case, D.A. Development and testing of a general amber force field. J. Compt. Chem. 2004, 25, 1157–1174, doi:10.1002/jcc.20035.
[35]
Bairgya, H.R.; Mukhopadhyay, B.P.; Bhattacharya, S. Role of the conserved water molecules in the binding of inhibitor to IMPDH-II (human): A study on the water mimic inhibitor design. J. Mol. Struct. 2009, 908, 31–39, doi:10.1016/j.theochem.2009.04.037.
[36]
Mobley, D.L. Let’s get honest about sampling. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2012, 26, 93–95, doi:10.1007/s10822-011-9497-y.
[37]
Ballester, P.J.; Mitchell, J.B.O. A machine learning approach to predicting protein-ligand binding affinity with applications to molecular docking. Bioinformatics 2010, 26, 1169–1175, doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq112.
[38]
Kawabata, T. Build-up algorithm for atomic correspondence between chemical structures. J. Chem. Inf. Mod. 2011, 51, 1775–1787, doi:10.1021/ci2001023.
[39]
Wang, J.; Cieplak, P.; Kollman, P.A. How well does a restrained electrostatic potential (RESP) model perform in calculating conformational energies of organic and biological molecules? J. Comput. Chem. 2000, 21, 1049–1074, doi:10.1002/1096-987X(200009)21:12<1049::AID-JCC3>3.0.CO;2-F.
Jorgensen, W.L.; Chandrasekhar, J.; Madura, J.D.; Impey, R.W.; Klein, M.L. Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating lipid water. J. Chem. Phys. 1983, 79, 926–935, doi:10.1063/1.445869.
[42]
Ryckaert, J.P.; Ciccotti, G.; Berendsen, H.J.C. Numerical integration of the cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints: Molecular dynamics of n-alkanes. J. Comput. Phys. 1977, 23, 327–341, doi:10.1016/0021-9991(77)90098-5.
[43]
Greengard, L.; Rokhlin, V. A fast algorithm for particle simulations. J. Comput. Phys. 1987, 73, 325–348, doi:10.1016/0021-9991(87)90140-9.
