Scoring functions for protein-ligand docking

Virtual screening by molecular docking has become established as a method for drug lead discovery and optimization. All docking algorithms make use of a scoring function in combination with a method of search. Two theoretical aspects of scoring function performance dominate operational performance. The first is the degree to which a scoring function has a global extremum within the ligand pose landscape at the proper location. The second is the degree to which the magnitude of the function at the extremum is accurate. Presuming adequate search strategies, a scoring function's location performance will dominate behavior with respect to docking accuracy: the degree to which a predicted pose of a ligand matches experimental observation. A scoring function's magnitude performance will dominate behavior with respect to screening utility: enrichment of true ligands over non-ligands. Magnitude estimation also controls pure scoring accuracy: the degree to which bona fide ligands of a particular protein may be correctly ranked. Approaches to the development of scoring functions have varied widely, with a number of functions yielding similarly high levels of performance relating to the location issue. However, even among functions performing equally well on location, widely varying performance is observed on the question of magnitude. In many cases, performance is good enough to yield high enrichments of true ligands versus non-ligands in screening across a wide variety of protein types. Generally, performance is not good enough to correctly rank among true ligands. Strategies for improvement are discussed.     

Multiple protein structures and multiple ligands: effects on the apparent goodness of virtual screening results

As an extension to a previous published study (McGaughey et al., J Chem Inf Model 47:1504–1519, 2007) comparing 2D and 3D similarity methods to docking, we apply a subset of those virtual screening methods (TOPOSIM, SQW, ROCS-color, and Glide) to a set of protein/ligand pairs where the protein is the target for docking and the cocrystallized ligand is the target for the similarity methods. Each protein is represented by a maximum of five crystal structures. We search a diverse subset of the MDDR as well as a diverse small subset of the MCIDB, Merck’s proprietary database. It is seen that the relative effectiveness of virtual screening methods, as measured by the enrichment factor, is highly dependent on the particular crystal structure or ligand, and on the database being searched. 2D similarity methods appear very good for the MDDR, but poor for the MCIDB. However, ROCS-color (a 3D similarity method) does well for both databases. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

SPOT‐Ligand: Fast and effective structure‐based virtual screening by binding homology search according to ligand and receptor similarity

Structure‐based virtual screening usually involves docking of a library of chemical compounds onto the functional pocket of the target receptor so as to discover novel classes of ligands. However, the overall success rate remains low and screening a large library is computationally intensive. An alternative to this “ab initio” approach is virtual screening by binding homology search. In this approach, potential ligands are predicted based on similar interaction pairs (similarity in receptors and ligands). SPOT‐Ligand is an approach that integrates ligand similarity by Tanimoto coefficient and receptor similarity by protein structure alignment program SPalign. The method was found to yield a consistent performance in DUD and DUD‐E docking benchmarks even if model structures were employed. It improves over docking methods (DOCK6 and AUTODOCK Vina) and has a performance comparable to or better than other binding‐homology methods (FINDsite and PoLi) with higher computational efficiency. The server is available at http://sparks-lab.org . © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Improving molecular docking through eHiTS’ tunable scoring function

We present three complementary approaches for score-tuning that improve docking performance in pose prediction, virtual screening and binding affinity assessment. The methodology utilizes experimental data to customize the scoring function for the system of interest considering the specific docking scenario. The tuning approach, which has been implemented as an automated utility in eHiTS, is introduced as a solution to one of the conundrums of the molecular docking paradigm, namely, the lack of a universally well performing scoring function. The accuracy of scoring functions has been shown to be generally system-dependent, and particularly lacking for binding energy and bio-activity predictions. In the proposed approach, pose and energy predictions are enhanced by adjusting the relative weights of the eHiTS energy terms to improve score-RMSD or score-affinity correlations. In a virtual screening context ligand-based similarity is used to rescale the docking score such that better enrichment factors are achieved. We discuss the algorithmic details of the methods, and demonstrate the effects of score tuning on a variety of targets, including CDK2, BACE1 and neuraminidase, as well as on the popular benchmarks—the Directory of Useful Decoys and the PDBBind database.     

Surflex-Dock: Docking benchmarks and real-world application

Benchmarks for molecular docking have historically focused on re-docking the cognate ligand of a well-determined protein-ligand complex to measure geometric pose prediction accuracy, and measurement of virtual screening performance has been focused on increasingly large and diverse sets of target protein structures, cognate ligands, and various types of decoy sets. Here, pose prediction is reported on the Astex Diverse set of 85 protein ligand complexes, and virtual screening performance is reported on the DUD set of 40 protein targets. In both cases, prepared structures of targets and ligands were provided by symposium organizers. The re-prepared data sets yielded results not significantly different than previous reports of Surflex-Dock on the two benchmarks. Minor changes to protein coordinates resulting from complex pre-optimization had large effects on observed performance, highlighting the limitations of cognate ligand re-docking for pose prediction assessment. Docking protocols developed for cross-docking, which address protein flexibility and produce discrete families of predicted poses, produced substantially better performance for pose prediction. Performance on virtual screening performance was shown to benefit by employing and combining multiple screening methods: docking, 2D molecular similarity, and 3D molecular similarity. In addition, use of multiple protein conformations significantly improved screening enrichment.     

QMOD: physically meaningful QSAR

Computational methods for predicting ligand affinity where no protein structure is known generally take the form of regression analysis based on molecular features that have only a tangential relationship to a protein/ligand binding event. Such methods have utility in retrospective rationalization of activity patterns of substituents on a common scaffold, but are limited when either multiple scaffolds are present or when ligand alignment varies significantly based on structural changes. In addition, such methods generally assume independence and additivity of effect from scaffold substituents. Collectively, these non-physical modeling assumptions sharply limit the utility of widely used QSAR approaches for prospective prediction of ligand activity. The recently introduced Surflex-QMOD approach, by virtue of constructing physical models of binding sites, comes closer to a modeling approach that is congruent with protein ligand binding events. A set of congeneric CDK2 inhibitors showed that induced binding pockets can be quite congruent with the enzyme’s active site but that model predictivity within a chemical series does not necessarily depend on congruence. Muscarinic antagonists were used to show that the QMOD approach is capable of making accurate predictions in cases where highly non-additive structure activity effects exist. The QMOD method offers a means to go beyond non-causative correlations in QSAR analysis.     

Bias, reporting, and sharing: computational evaluations of docking methods

Computational methods for docking ligands to protein binding sites have become ubiquitous in drug discovery. Despite the age of the field, no standards have been established with respect to methodological evaluation of docking accuracy, virtual screening utility, or scoring accuracy. There are critical issues relating to data sharing, data set design and preparation, and statistical reporting that have an impact on the degree to which a report will translate into real-world performance. These issues also have an impact on whether there is a transparent relationship between methodological changes and reported performance improvements. This paper presents detailed examples of pitfalls in each area and makes recommendations as to best practices.     

Scoring noncovalent protein-ligand interactions: A continuous differentiable function tuned to compute binding affinities

Summary Exploitation of protein structures for potential drug leads by molecular docking is critically dependent on methods for scoring putative protein-ligand interactions. An ideal function for scoring must exhibit predictive accuracy and high computational speed, and must be tolerant of variations in the relative protein-ligand molecular alignment and conformation. This paper describes the development of an empirically derived scoring function, based on the binding affinities of protein-ligand complexes coupled with their crystallographically determined structures. The function's primary terms involve hydrophobic and polar complementarity, with additional terms for entropic and solvation effects. The issue of alignment/conformation dependence was solved by constructing a continuous differentiable nonlinear function with the requirement that maxima in ligand conformation/alignment space corresponded closely to crystallographically determined structures. The expected error in the predicted affinity based on cross-validation was 1.0 log unit. The function is sufficiently fast and accurate to serve as the objective function of a molecular-docking search engine. The function is particularly well suited to the docking problem, since it has spatially narrow maxima that are broadly accessible via gradient descent.     

Evaluations of molecular docking programs for virtual screening

Structure-based virtual screening is carried out using molecular docking programs. A number of such docking programs are currently available, and the selection of docking program is difficult without knowing the characteristics or performance of each program. In this study, the screening performances of three molecular docking programs, DOCK, AutoDock, and GOLD, were evaluated with 116 target proteins. The screening performances were validated using two novel standards, along with a traditional enrichment rate measurement. For the evaluations, each docking run was repeated 1000 times with three initial conformations of a ligand. While each docking program has some merit over the other docking programs in some aspects, DOCK showed an unexpectedly better screening performance in the enrichment rates. Finally, we made several recommendations based on the evaluation results to enhance the screening performances of the docking programs.     

Comparative performance of several flexible docking programs and scoring functions: enrichment studies for a diverse set of pharmaceutically relevant targets

Virtual screening by molecular docking has become a widely used approach to lead discovery in the pharmaceutical industry when a high-resolution structure of the biological target of interest is available. The performance of three widely used docking programs (Glide, GOLD, and DOCK) for virtual database screening is studied when they are applied to the same protein target and ligand set. Comparisons of the docking programs and scoring functions using a large and diverse data set of pharmaceutically interesting targets and active compounds are carried out. We focus on the problem of docking and scoring flexible compounds which are sterically capable of docking into a rigid conformation of the receptor. The Glide XP methodology is shown to consistently yield enrichments superior to the two alternative methods, while GOLD outperforms DOCK on average. The study also shows that docking into multiple receptor structures can decrease the docking error in screening a diverse set of active compounds.     

Similarity based docking

We have recently introduced GMA, a highly efficient method for flexible molecular alignment. Here we show how this approach can be used to improve docking accuracy and efficiency, in cases where a complex structure of a ligand with the target protein is known. In cases where a known ligand exists, yet the complex structure is unknown it is possible to make use of the advantages offered by this approach, by combining it with standard ligand docking.     

Performance of multiple docking and refinement methods in the pose prediction D3R prospective Grand Challenge 2016

We describe the performance of multiple pose prediction methods for the D3R 2016 Grand Challenge. The pose prediction challenge includes 36 ligands, which represent 4 chemotypes and some miscellaneous structures against the FXR ligand binding domain. In this study we use a mix of fully automated methods as well as human-guided methods with considerations of both the challenge data and publicly available data. The methods include ensemble docking, colony entropy pose prediction, target selection by molecular similarity, molecular dynamics guided pose refinement, and pose selection by visual inspection. We evaluated the success of our predictions by method, chemotype, and relevance of publicly available data. For the overall data set, ensemble docking, visual inspection, and molecular dynamics guided pose prediction performed the best with overall mean RMSDs of 2.4, 2.2, and 2.2 Å respectively. For several individual challenge molecules, the best performing method is evaluated in light of that particular ligand. We also describe the protein, ligand, and public information data preparations that are typical of our binding mode prediction workflow.     

FWAVina: A novel optimization algorithm for protein-ligand docking based on the fireworks algorithm

Protein-ligand docking is an essential process that has accelerated drug discovery. How to accurately and effectively optimize the predominant position and orientation of ligands in the binding pocket of a target protein is a major challenge. This paper proposed a novel ligand binding pose search method called FWAVina based on the fireworks algorithm, which combined the fireworks algorithm with the efficient Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shannon local search method adopted in AutoDock Vina to address the pose search problem in docking. The FWA was used as a global optimizer to rapidly search promising poses, and the Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shannon method was incorporated into FWAVina to perform an exact local search. FWAVina was developed and tested on the PDBbind and DUD-E datasets. The docking performance of FWAVina was compared with the original Vina program. The results showed that FWAVina achieves a remarkable execution time reduction of more than 50 % than Vina without compromising the prediction accuracies in the docking and virtual screening experiments. In addition, the increase in the number of ligand rotatable bonds has almost no effect on the efficiency of FWAVina. The higher accuracy, faster convergence and improved stability make the FWAVina method a better choice of docking tool for computer-aided drug design. The source code is available at https://github.com/eddyblue/FWAVina/.     

A new peptide docking strategy using a mean field technique with mutually orthogonal Latin square sampling

The theoretical prediction of the association of a flexible ligand with a protein receptor requires efficient sampling of the conformational space of the ligand. Several docking methodologies are currently available. We propose a new docking technique that performs well at low computational cost. The method uses mutually orthogonal Latin squares to efficiently sample the docking space. A variant of the mean field technique is used to analyze this sample to arrive at the optimum. The method has been previously applied to explore the conformational space of peptides and identify structures with low values for the potential energy. Here we extend this method to simultaneously identify both the low energy conformation as well as a ‘high-scoring’ docking mode. Application of the method to 56 protein–peptide complexes, in which the length of the peptide ligand ranges from three to seven residues, and comparisons with Autodock 3.05, showed that the method works well. Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Flexible CDOCKER: Development and application of a pseudo‐explicit structure‐based docking method within CHARMM

Protein‐ligand docking is a commonly used method for lead identification and refinement. While traditional structure‐based docking methods represent the receptor as a rigid body, recent developments have been moving toward the inclusion of protein flexibility. Proteins exist in an interconverting ensemble of conformational states, but effectively and efficiently searching the conformational space available to both the receptor and ligand remains a well‐appreciated computational challenge. To this end, we have developed the Flexible CDOCKER method as an extension of the family of complete docking solutions available within CHARMM. This method integrates atomically detailed side chain flexibility with grid‐based docking methods, maintaining efficiency while allowing the protein and ligand configurations to explore their conformational space simultaneously. This is in contrast to existing approaches that use induced‐fit like sampling, such as Glide or Autodock, where the protein or the ligand space is sampled independently in an iterative fashion. Presented here are developments to the CHARMM docking methodology to incorporate receptor flexibility and improvements to the sampling protocol as demonstrated with re‐docking trials on a subset of the CCDC/Astex set. These developments within CDOCKER achieve docking accuracy competitive with or exceeding the performance of other widely utilized docking programs. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The MPSim-Dock hierarchical docking algorithm: application to the eight trypsin inhibitor cocrystals

To help improve the accuracy of protein-ligand docking as a useful tool for drug discovery, we developed MPSim-Dock, which ensures a comprehensive sampling of diverse families of ligand conformations in the binding region followed by an enrichment of the good energy scoring families so that the energy scores of the sampled conformations can be reliably used to select the best conformation of the ligand. This combines elements of DOCK4.0 with molecular dynamics (MD) methods available in the software, MPSim. We test here the efficacy of MPSim-Dock to predict the 64 protein-ligand combinations formed by starting with eight trypsin cocrystals, and crossdocking the other seven ligands to each protein conformation. We consider this as a model for how well the method would work for one given target protein structure. Using as a criterion that the structures within 2 kcal/mol of the top scoring include a conformation within a coordinate root mean square (CRMS) of 1 A of the crystal structure, we find that 100% of the 64 cases are predicted correctly. This indicates that MPSim-Dock can be used reliably to identify strongly binding ligands, making it useful for virtual ligand screening.     

Comparative study of several algorithms for flexible ligand docking

We have performed a comparative assessment of several programs for flexible molecular docking: DOCK 4.0, FlexX 1.8, AutoDock 3.0, GOLD 1.2 and ICM 2.8. This was accomplished using two different studies: docking experiments on a data set of 37 protein-ligand complexes and screening a library containing 10,037 entries against 11 different proteins. The docking accuracy of the methods was judged based on the corresponding rank-one solutions. We have found that the fraction of molecules docked with acceptable accuracy is 0.47, 0.31, 0.35, 0.52 and 0.93 for, respectively, AutoDock, DOCK, FlexX, GOLD and ICM. Thus ICM provided the highest accuracy in ligand docking against these receptors. The results from the other programs are found to be less accurate and of approximately the same quality. A speed comparison demonstrated that FlexX was the fastest and AutoDock was the slowest among the tested docking programs. The database screening was performed using DOCK, FlexX and ICM. ICM was able to identify the original ligands within the top 1% of the total library in 17 cases. The corresponding number for DOCK and FlexX was 7 and 8, respectively. We have estimated that in virtual database screening, 50% of the potentially active compounds will be found among approximately 1.5% of the top scoring solutions found with ICM and among approximately 9% of the top scoring solutions produced by DOCK and FlexX.