DOX: A new computational protocol for accurate prediction of the protein–ligand binding structures

Molecular docking techniques have now been widely used to predict the protein–ligand binding modes, especially when the structures of crystal complexes are not available. Most docking algorithms are able to effectively generate and rank a large number of probable binding poses. However, it is hard for them to accurately evaluate these poses and identify the most accurate binding structure. In this study, we first examined the performance of some docking programs, based on a testing set made of 15 crystal complexes with drug statins for the human 3‐hydroxy‐3‐methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGR). We found that most of the top ranking HMGR–statin binding poses, predicted by the docking programs, were energetically unstable as revealed by the high theoretical‐level calculations, which were usually accompanied by the large deviations from the geometric parameters of the corresponding crystal binding structures. Subsequently, we proposed a new computational protocol, DOX, based on the joint use of molecular Docking, ONIOM, and eXtended ONIOM (XO) methods to predict the accurate binding structures for the protein–ligand complexes of interest. Our testing results demonstrate that the DOX protocol can efficiently predict accurate geometries for all 15 HMGR‐statin crystal complexes without exception. This study suggests a promising computational route, as an effective alternative to the experimental one, toward predicting the accurate binding structures, which is the prerequisite for all the deep understandings of the properties, functions, and mechanisms of the protein–ligand complexes. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

PepPro: A Nonredundant Structure Data Set for Benchmarking Peptide–Protein Computational Docking

We present a nonredundant benchmark, coined PepPro, for testing peptide–protein docking algorithms. Currently, PepPro contains 89 nonredundant experimentally determined peptide–protein complex structures, with peptide sequence lengths ranging from 5 to 30 amino acids. The benchmark covers peptides with distinct secondary structures, including helix, partial helix, a mixture of helix and β-sheet, β-sheet formed through binding, β-sheet formed through self-folding, and coil. In addition, unbound proteins' structures are provided for 58 complexes and can be used for testing the ability of a docking algorithm handling the conformational changes of proteins during the binding process. PepPro should benefit the docking community for the development and improvement of peptide docking algorithms. The benchmark is available at http://zoulab.dalton.missouri.edu/PepPro_benchmark . © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A nonredundant structure dataset for benchmarking protein‐RNA computational docking

Protein–RNA interactions play an important role in many biological processes. The ability to predict the molecular structures of protein–RNA complexes from docking would be valuable for understanding the underlying chemical mechanisms. We have developed a novel nonredundant benchmark dataset for protein–RNA docking and scoring. The diverse dataset of 72 targets consists of 52 unbound–unbound test complexes, and 20 unbound–bound test complexes. Here, unbound–unbound complexes refer to cases in which both binding partners of the cocrystallized complex are either in apo form or in a conformation taken from a different protein–RNA complex, whereas unbound–bound complexes are cases in which only one of the two binding partners has another experimentally determined conformation. The dataset is classified into three categories according to the interface root mean square deviation and the percentage of native contacts in the unbound structures: 49 easy, 16 medium, and 7 difficult targets. The bound and unbound cases of the benchmark dataset are expected to benefit the development and improvement of docking and scoring algorithms for the docking community. All the easy‐to‐view structures are freely available to the public at http://zoulab.dalton.missouri.edu/RNAbenchmark/ . © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Predicting the accuracy of protein–ligand docking on homology models

Ligand–protein docking is increasingly used in Drug Discovery. The initial limitations imposed by a reduced availability of target protein structures have been overcome by the use of theoretical models, especially those derived by homology modeling techniques. While this greatly extended the use of docking simulations, it also introduced the need for general and robust criteria to estimate the reliability of docking results given the model quality. To this end, a large‐scale experiment was performed on a diverse set including experimental structures and homology models for a group of representative ligand–protein complexes. A wide spectrum of model quality was sampled using templates at different evolutionary distances and different strategies for target–template alignment and modeling. The obtained models were scored by a selection of the most used model quality indices. The binding geometries were generated using AutoDock, one of the most common docking programs. An important result of this study is that indeed quantitative and robust correlations exist between the accuracy of docking results and the model quality, especially in the binding site. Moreover, state‐of‐the‐art indices for model quality assessment are already an effective tool for an a priori prediction of the accuracy of docking experiments in the context of groups of proteins with conserved structural characteristics. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem, 2010     

Improving binding mode and binding affinity predictions of docking by ligand-based search of protein conformations: evaluation in D3R grand challenge 2015

The growing number of protein–ligand complex structures, particularly the structures of proteins co-bound with different ligands, in the Protein Data Bank helps us tackle two major challenges in molecular docking studies: the protein flexibility and the scoring function. Here, we introduced a systematic strategy by using the information embedded in the known protein–ligand complex structures to improve both binding mode and binding affinity predictions. Specifically, a ligand similarity calculation method was employed to search a receptor structure with a bound ligand sharing high similarity with the query ligand for the docking use. The strategy was applied to the two datasets (HSP90 and MAP4K4) in recent D3R Grand Challenge 2015. In addition, for the HSP90 dataset, a system-specific scoring function (ITScore2_hsp90) was generated by recalibrating our statistical potential-based scoring function (ITScore2) using the known protein–ligand complex structures and the statistical mechanics-based iterative method. For the HSP90 dataset, better performances were achieved for both binding mode and binding affinity predictions comparing with the original ITScore2 and with ensemble docking. For the MAP4K4 dataset, although there were only eight known protein–ligand complex structures, our docking strategy achieved a comparable performance with ensemble docking. Our method for receptor conformational selection and iterative method for the development of system-specific statistical potential-based scoring functions can be easily applied to other protein targets that have a number of protein–ligand complex structures available to improve predictions on binding.     

Modeling large protein–glycosaminoglycan complexes using a fragment-based approach

Glycosaminoglycans (GAGs), a major constituent of the extracellular matrix, participate in cell-signaling by binding specific proteins. Structural data on protein–GAG interactions are crucial to understand and modulate these signaling processes, with potential applications in regenerative medicine. However, experimental and theoretical approaches used to study GAG–protein systems are challenged by GAGs high flexibility limiting the conformational sampling above a certain size, and by the scarcity of GAG-specific docking tools compared to protein–protein or protein–drug docking approaches. We present for the first time an automated fragment-based method for docking GAGs on a protein binding site. In this approach, trimeric GAG fragments are flexibly docked to the protein, assembled based on their spacial overlap, and refined by molecular dynamics. The method appeared more successful than the classical full-ligand approach for most of 13 tested complexes with known structure. The approach is particularly promising for docking of long GAG chains, which represents a bottleneck for classical docking approaches applied to these systems. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Recent progress and future directions in protein-protein docking

This article gives an overview of recent progress in protein-protein docking and it identifies several directions for future research. Recent results from the CAPRI blind docking experiments show that docking algorithms are steadily improving in both reliability and accuracy. Current docking algorithms employ a range of efficient search and scoring strategies, including e.g. fast Fourier transform correlations, geometric hashing, and Monte Carlo techniques. These approaches can often produce a relatively small list of up to a few thousand orientations, amongst which a near-native binding mode is often observed. However, despite the use of improved scoring functions which typically include models of desolvation, hydrophobicity, and electrostatics, current algorithms still have difficulty in identifying the correct solution from the list of false positives, or decoys. Nonetheless, significant progress is being made through better use of bioinformatics, biochemical, and biophysical information such as e.g. sequence conservation analysis, protein interaction databases, alanine scanning, and NMR residual dipolar coupling restraints to help identify key binding residues. Promising new approaches to incorporate models of protein flexibility during docking are being developed, including the use of molecular dynamics snapshots, rotameric and off-rotamer searches, internal coordinate mechanics, and principal component analysis based techniques. Some investigators now use explicit solvent models in their docking protocols. Many of these approaches can be computationally intensive, although new silicon chip technologies such as programmable graphics processor units are beginning to offer competitive alternatives to conventional high performance computer systems. As cryo-EM techniques improve apace, docking NMR and X-ray protein structures into low resolution EM density maps is helping to bridge the resolution gap between these complementary techniques. The use of symmetry and fragment assembly constraints are also helping to make possible docking-based predictions of large multimeric protein complexes. In the near future, the closer integration of docking algorithms with protein interface prediction software, structural databases, and sequence analysis techniques should help produce better predictions of protein interaction networks and more accurate structural models of the fundamental molecular interactions within the cell.     

Evaluation of a knowledge‐based potential of mean force for scoring docked protein–ligand complexes

The Biomolecular Ligand Energy Evaluation Protocol (BLEEP) is a knowledge‐based potential derived from high‐resolution X‐ray structures of protein–ligand complexes. The performance of this potential in ranking the hypothetical structures resulting from a docking study has been evaluated using fifteen protein–ligand complexes from the Protein Data Bank. In the majority of complexes BLEEP was successful in identifying the native (experimental) binding mode or an alternative of low rms deviation (from the native) as the lowest in energy. Overall BLEEP is slightly better than the DOCK energy function in discriminating native‐like modes. Even when alternative binding modes rank lower than the native structure, a reasonable energy is assigned to the latter. Breaking down the BLEEP scores into the atom–atom contributions reveals that this type of potential is grossly dominated by longer range interactions (>5 Å), which makes it relatively insensitive to small local variations in the binding site. However, despite this limitation, the lack, at present, of accurate protein–ligand potentials means that BLEEP is a promising approach to improve the filtering of structures resulting from docking programs. Moreover, BLEEP should improve with the continuously increasing number of complexes available in the PDB. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Comput Chem 22: 673–688, 2001     

Prediction of the interaction of metallic moieties with proteins: An update for protein‐ligand docking techniques

In this article, we present a new approach to expand the range of application of protein‐ligand docking methods in the prediction of the interaction of coordination complexes (i.e., metallodrugs, natural and artificial cofactors, etc.) with proteins. To do so, we assume that, from a pure computational point of view, hydrogen bond functions could be an adequate model for the coordination bonds as both share directionality and polarity aspects. In this model, docking of metalloligands can be performed without using any geometrical constraints or energy restraints. The hard work consists in generating the convenient atom types and scoring functions. To test this approach, we applied our model to 39 high‐quality X‐ray structures with transition and main group metal complexes bound via a unique coordination bond to a protein. This concept was implemented in the protein‐ligand docking program GOLD. The results are in very good agreement with the experimental structures: the percentage for which the RMSD of the simulated pose is smaller than the X‐ray spectra resolution is 92.3% and the mean value of RMSD is < 1.0 Å. Such results also show the viability of the method to predict metal complexes–proteins interactions when the X‐ray structure is not available. This work could be the first step for novel applicability of docking techniques in medicinal and bioinorganic chemistry and appears generalizable enough to be implemented in most protein‐ligand docking programs nowadays available. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Protein-protein binding sites prediction by 3D structural similarities

Identifying the location of binding sites on proteins is of fundamental importance for a wide range of applications including molecular docking, de novo drug design, structure identification, and comparison of functional sites. In this paper, we develop an efficient approach for finding binding sites between proteins. Our approach consists of four steps: local sequence alignment, protein surface detection, 3D structure comparison, and candidate binding site selection. A comparison of our method with the LSA algorithm shows that the binding sites predicted by our method are somewhat closer to the actual binding sites in the protein-protein complexes. The software package is available at http://sites.google.com/site/guofeics/pro-bs for noncommercial use.     

AADS--an automated active site identification, docking, and scoring protocol for protein targets based on physicochemical descriptors

We report here a robust automated active site detection, docking, and scoring (AADS) protocol for proteins with known structures. The active site finder identifies all cavities in a protein and scores them based on the physicochemical properties of functional groups lining the cavities in the protein. The accuracy realized on 620 proteins with sizes ranging from 100 to 600 amino acids with known drug active sites is 100% when the top ten cavity points are considered. These top ten cavity points identified are then submitted for an automated docking of an input ligand/candidate molecule. The docking protocol uses an all atom energy based Monte Carlo method. Eight low energy docked structures corresponding to different locations and orientations of the candidate molecule are stored at each cavity point giving 80 docked structures overall which are then ranked using an effective free energy function and top five structures are selected. The predicted structure and energetics of the complexes agree quite well with experiment when tested on a data set of 170 protein-ligand complexes with known structures and binding affinities. The AADS methodology is implemented on an 80 processor cluster and presented as a freely accessible, easy to use tool at http://www.scfbio-iitd.res.in/dock/ActiveSite_new.jsp .     

Alternative to consensus scoring--a new approach toward the qualitative combination of docking algorithms

Since the development of the first docking algorithm in the early 1980s a variety of different docking approaches and tools has been created in order to solve the docking problem. Subsequent studies have shown that the docking performance of most tools strongly depends on the considered target. Thus it is hard to choose the best algorithm in the situation at hand. The docking tools FlexX and AutoDock are among the most popular programs for docking flexible ligands into target proteins. Their analysis, comparison, and combination are the topics of this study. In contrast to standard consensus scoring techniques which integrate different scoring algorithms usually only by their rank, we focus on a more general approach. Our new combined docking workflow-AutoxX-unifies the interaction models of AutoDock and FlexX rather than combining the scores afterward which allows interpretability of the results. The performance of FlexX, AutoDock, and the combined algorithm AutoxX was evaluated on the basis of a test set of 204 structures from the Protein Data Bank (PDB). AutoDock and FlexX show a highly diverse redocking accuracy at the different complexes which assures again the usefulness of taking several docking algorithms into account. With the combined docking the number of complexes reproduced below an rmsd of 2.5 A could be raised by 10. AutoxX had a strong positive effect on several targets. The highest performance increase could be found when redocking 20 protein-ligand complexes of alpha-thrombin, plasmepsin, neuraminidase, and d-xylose isomerase. A decrease was found for gamma-chymotrypsin. The results show that--applied to the right target-AutoxX can improve the docking performance compared to AutoDock and FlexX alone.     

Sensitivity of molecular docking to induced fit effects in influenza virus neuraminidase

Many proteins undergo small side chain or even backbone movements on binding of different ligands into the same protein structure. This is known as induced fit and is potentially problematic for virtual screening of databases against protein targets. In this report we investigate the limits of the rigid protein approximation used by the docking program, GOLD, through cross-docking using protein structures of influenza neuraminidase. Neuraminidase is known to exhibit small but significant induced fit effects on ligand binding. Some neuraminidase crystal structures caused concern due to the bound ligand conformation and GOLD performed poorly on these complexes. A `clean' set, which contained unique, unambiguous complexes, was defined. For this set, the lowest energy structure was correctly docked (i.e. RMSD < 1.5 Å away from the crystal reference structure) in 84% of proteins, and the most promiscuous protein (1mwe) was able to dock all 15 ligands accurately including those that normally required an induced fit movement. This is considerably better than the 70% success rate seen with GOLD against general validation sets. Inclusion of specific water molecules involved in water-mediated hydrogen bonds did not significantly improve the docking performance for ligands that formed water-mediated contacts but it did prevent docking of ligands that displaced these waters. Our data supports the use of a single protein structure for virtual screening with GOLD in some applications involving induced fit effects, although care must be taken to identify the protein structure that performs best against a wide variety of ligands. The performance of GOLD was significantly better than the GOLD implementation of ChemScore and the reasons for this are discussed. Overall, GOLD has shown itself to be an extremely good, robust docking program for this system.     

Can we trust docking results? Evaluation of seven commonly used programs on PDBbind database

Docking is one of the most commonly used techniques in drug design. It is used for both identifying correct poses of a ligand in the binding site of a protein as well as for the estimation of the strength of protein–ligand interaction. Because millions of compounds must be screened, before a suitable target for biological testing can be identified, all calculations should be done in a reasonable time frame. Thus, all programs currently in use exploit empirically based algorithms, avoiding systematic search of the conformational space. Similarly, the scoring is done using simple equations, which makes it possible to speed up the entire process. Therefore, docking results have to be verified by subsequent in vitro studies. The purpose of our work was to evaluate seven popular docking programs (Surflex, LigandFit, Glide, GOLD, FlexX, eHiTS, and AutoDock) on the extensive dataset composed of 1300 protein–ligands complexes from PDBbind 2007 database, where experimentally measured binding affinity values were also available. We compared independently the ability of proper posing [according to Root mean square deviation (or Root mean square distance) of predicted conformations versus the corresponding native one] and scoring (by calculating the correlation between docking score and ligand binding strength). To our knowledge, it is the first large‐scale docking evaluation that covers both aspects of docking programs, that is, predicting ligand conformation and calculating the strength of its binding. More than 1000 protein–ligand pairs cover a wide range of different protein families and inhibitor classes. Our results clearly showed that the ligand binding conformation could be identified in most cases by using the existing software, yet we still observed the lack of universal scoring function for all types of molecules and protein families. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem, 2011     

Docking of small ligands to low-resolution and theoretically predicted receptor structures

We have developed a simple docking procedure that is able to utilize low-resolution models of proteins created by structure prediction algorithms such as threading or ab initio folding to predict the conformation of receptor-small ligand complexes. In our approach, using only approximate, discretized models of both molecules, we search for the steric and quasi-chemical complementarity between a ligand and the receptor molecules. This averaging procedure allows for the compensation of numerous structural inaccuracies resulting from the theoretical predictions of the receptor structure. The best relative orientation of these two models is obtained by an exhaustive scan over the rigid body's six-dimensional translational and rotational degrees of freedom. The search method is based on a real space grid-searching algorithm, unlike docking methods based on the fast Fourier Transform algorithm. We have applied this algorithm to rebuild structures of several complexes available in the Protein Data Bank. The structures of the receptors are produced by means of our threading algorithm PROSPECTOR, subsequently refined, and then utilized in the docking experiment. In many cases, not only is the localization of the binding site on the receptor surface correctly identified, but the proper orientation of the bounded ligand is also reasonably well reproduced within the level of accuracy of the modeled receptor itself.     

A large decoy set of protein–protein complexes produced by flexible docking

Computational methods are needed to help characterize the structure and function of protein–protein complexes. To develop and improve such methods, standard test problems are essential. One important test is to identify experimental structures from among large sets of decoys. Here, a flexible docking procedure was used to produce such a large ensemble of decoy complexes. In addition to their use for structure prediction, they can serve as a proxy for the nonspecific, protein–protein complexes that occur transiently in the cell, which are hard to characterize experimentally, yet biochemically important. For 202 homodimers and 41 heterodimers with known X‐ray structures, we produced an average of 1217 decoys each. The structures were characterized in detail. The decoys have rather large protein–protein interfaces, with at least 45 residue–residue contacts for every 100 contacts found in the experimental complex. They have limited intramonomer deformation and limited intermonomer steric conflicts. The decoys thoroughly sample each monomer's surface, with all the surface amino acids being part of at least one decoy interface. The decoys with the lowest intramonomer deformation were analyzed separately, as proxies for nonspecific protein–protein complexes. Their interfaces are less hydrophobic than the experimental ones, with an amino acid composition similar to the overall surface composition. They have a poorer shape complementarity and a weaker association energy, but are no more fragmented than the experimental interfaces, with 2.1 distinct patches of interacting residues on average, compared to 2.6 for the experimental interfaces. The decoys should be useful for testing and parameterizing docking methods and scoring functions; they are freely available as PDB files at http://biology.polytechnique.fr/decoys . © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem, 2010     

Structural models of protein-DNA complexes based on interface prediction and docking

Protein-DNA interactions are the physical basis of gene expression and DNA modification. Structural models that reveal these interactions are essential for their understanding. As only a limited number of structures for protein-DNA complexes have been determined by experimental methods, computation methods provide a potential way to fill the need. We have developed the DISPLAR method to predict DNA binding sites on proteins. Predicted binding sites have been used to assist the building of structural models by docking, either by guiding the docking or by selecting near-native candidates from the docked poses. Here we applied the DISPLAR method to predict the DNA binding sites for 20 DNA-binding proteins, which have had their DNA binding sites characterized by NMR chemical shift perturbation. For two of these proteins, the structures of their complexes with DNA have also been determined. With the help of the DISPLAR predictions, we built structural models for these two complexes. Evaluations of both the DNA binding sites for 20 proteins and the structural models of the two protein-DNA complexes against experimental results demonstrate the significant promise of our model-building approach.     

FIPSDock: A new molecular docking technique driven by fully informed swarm optimization algorithm

The accurate prediction of protein–ligand binding is of great importance for rational drug design. We present herein a novel docking algorithm called as FIPSDock, which implements a variant of the Fully Informed Particle Swarm (FIPS) optimization method and adopts the newly developed energy function of AutoDock 4.20 suite for solving flexible protein–ligand docking problems. The search ability and docking accuracy of FIPSDock were first evaluated by multiple cognate docking experiments. In a benchmarking test for 77 protein/ligand complex structures derived from GOLD benchmark set, FIPSDock has obtained a successful predicting rate of 93.5% and outperformed a few docking programs including particle swarm optimization (PSO)@AutoDock, SODOCK, AutoDock, DOCK, Glide, GOLD, FlexX, Surflex, and MolDock. More importantly, FIPSDock was evaluated against PSO@AutoDock, SODOCK, and AutoDock 4.20 suite by cross‐docking experiments of 74 protein–ligand complexes among eight protein targets (CDK2, ESR1, F2, MAPK14, MMP8, MMP13, PDE4B, and PDE5A) derived from Sutherland‐crossdock‐set. Remarkably, FIPSDock is superior to PSO@AutoDock, SODOCK, and AutoDock in seven out of eight cross‐docking experiments. The results reveal that FIPS algorithm might be more suitable than the conventional genetic algorithm‐based algorithms in dealing with highly flexible docking problems. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Ligand-specific scoring functions: improved ranking of docking solutions1

Molecular docking is a powerful computational method that has been widely used in many biomolecular studies to predict geometry of a protein-ligand complex. However, while its conformational search algorithms are usually able to generate correct conformation of a ligand in the binding site, the scoring methods often fail to discriminate it among many false variants. We propose to treat this problem by applying more precise ligand-specific scoring filters to re-rank docking solutions. In this way specific features of interactions between protein and different types of compounds can be implicitly taken into account. New scoring functions were constructed including hydrogen bonds, hydrophobic and hydrophilic complementarity terms. These scoring functions also discriminate ligands by the size of the molecule, the total hydrophobicity, and the number of peptide bonds for peptide ligands. Weighting coefficients of the scoring functions were adjusted using a training set of 60 protein–ligand complexes. The proposed method was then tested on the results of docking obtained for an additional 70 complexes. In both cases the success rate was 5–8% better compared to the standard functions implemented in popular docking software.