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.     

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.     

Using correlated parameters for improved ranking of protein-protein docking decoys

A successful protein–protein docking study culminates in identification of decoys at top ranks with near‐native quaternary structures. However, this task remains enigmatic because no generalized scoring functions exist that effectively infer decoys according to the similarity to near‐native quaternary structures. Difficulties arise because of the highly irregular nature of the protein surface and the significant variation of the nonbonding and solvation energies based on the chemical composition of the protein–protein interface. In this work, we describe a novel method combining an interface‐size filter, a regression model for geometric compatibility (based on two correlated surface and packing parameters), and normalized interaction energy (calculated from correlated nonbonded and solvation energies), to effectively rank decoys from a set of 10,000 decoys. Tests on 30 unbound binary protein–protein complexes show that in 16 cases we can identify at least one decoy in top three ranks having ≤10 Å backbone root mean square deviation from true binding geometry. Comparisons with other state‐of‐art methods confirm the improved ranking power of our method without the use of any experiment‐guided restraints, evolutionary information, statistical propensities, or modified interaction energy equations. Tests on 118 less‐difficult bound binary protein–protein complexes with ≤35% sequence redundancy at the interface showed that in 77% cases, at least 1 in 10,000 decoys were identified with ≤5Å backbone root mean square deviation from true geometry at first rank. The work will promote the use of new concepts where correlations among parameters provide more robust scoring models. It will facilitate studies involving molecular interactions, including modeling of large macromolecular assemblies and protein structure prediction. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem, 2011.     

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.     

VoteDock: Consensus docking method for prediction of protein–ligand interactions

Molecular recognition plays a fundamental role in all biological processes, and that is why great efforts have been made to understand and predict protein–ligand interactions. Finding a molecule that can potentially bind to a target protein is particularly essential in drug discovery and still remains an expensive and time‐consuming task. In silico, tools are frequently used to screen molecular libraries to identify new lead compounds, and if protein structure is known, various protein–ligand docking programs can be used. The aim of docking procedure is to predict correct poses of ligand in the binding site of the protein as well as to score them according to the strength of interaction in a reasonable time frame. The purpose of our studies was to present the novel consensus approach to predict both protein–ligand complex structure and its corresponding binding affinity. Our method used as the input the results from seven docking programs (Surflex, LigandFit, Glide, GOLD, FlexX, eHiTS, and AutoDock) that are widely used for docking of ligands. We evaluated it on the extensive benchmark dataset of 1300 protein–ligands pairs from refined PDBbind database for which the structural and affinity data was available. We compared independently its ability of proper scoring and posing to the previously proposed methods. In most cases, our method is able to dock properly approximately 20% of pairs more than docking methods on average, and over 10% of pairs more than the best single program. The RMSD value of the predicted complex conformation versus its native one is reduced by a factor of 0.5 Å. Finally, we were able to increase the Pearson correlation of the predicted binding affinity in comparison with the experimental value up to 0.5. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem 32: 568–581, 2011     

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     

Protein‐protein docking by shape‐complementarity and property matching

We present a computational approach to protein‐protein docking based on surface shape complementarity (“ProBinder”). Within this docking approach, we implemented a new surface decomposition method that considers local shape features on the protein surface. This new surface shape decomposition results in a deterministic representation of curvature features on the protein surface, such as “knobs,” “holes,” and “flats” together with their point normals. For the actual docking procedure, we used geometric hashing, which allows for the rapid, translation‐, and rotation‐free comparison of point coordinates. Candidate solutions were scored based on knowledge‐based potentials and steric criteria. The potentials included electrostatic complementarity, desolvation energy, amino acid contact preferences, and a van‐der‐Waals potential. We applied ProBinder to a diverse test set of 68 bound and 30 unbound test cases compiled from the Dockground database. Sixty‐four percent of the protein‐protein test complexes were ranked with an root mean square deviation (RMSD) < 5 Å to the target solution among the top 10 predictions for the bound data set. In 82% of the unbound samples, docking poses were ranked within the top ten solutions with an RMSD < 10 Å to the target solution. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem, 2010     

A Bayesian statistical approach of improving knowledge‐based scoring functions for protein–ligand interactions

Knowledge‐based scoring functions are widely used for assessing putative complexes in protein–ligand and protein–protein docking and for structure prediction. Even with large training sets, knowledge‐based scoring functions face the inevitable problem of sparse data. Here, we have developed a novel approach for handling the sparse data problem that is based on estimating the inaccuracies in knowledge‐based scoring functions. This inaccuracy estimation is used to automatically weight the knowledge‐based scoring function with an alternative, force‐field‐based potential (FFP) that does not rely on training data and can, therefore, provide an improved approximation of the interactions between rare chemical groups. The current version of STScore, a protein–ligand scoring function using our method, achieves a binding mode prediction success rate of 91% on the set of 100 complexes by Wang et al., and a binding affinity correlation of 0.514 with the experimentally determined affinities in PDBbind. The method presented here may be used with other FFPs and other knowledge‐based scoring functions and can also be applied to protein–protein docking and protein structure prediction. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

GalaxyDock3: Protein–ligand docking that considers the full ligand conformational flexibility

Predicting conformational changes of both the protein and the ligand is a major challenge when a protein–ligand complex structure is predicted from the unbound protein and ligand structures. Herein, we introduce a new protein–ligand docking program called GalaxyDock3 that considers the full ligand conformational flexibility by explicitly sampling the ligand ring conformation and allowing the relaxation of the full ligand degrees of freedom, including bond angles and lengths. This method is based on the previous version (GalaxyDock2) which performs the global optimization of a designed score function. Ligand ring conformation is sampled from a ring conformation library constructed from structure databases. The GalaxyDock3 score function was trained with an additional bonded energy term for the ligand on a large set of complex structures. The performance of GalaxyDock3 was improved compared to GalaxyDock2 when predicted ligand conformation was used as the input for docking, especially when the input ligand conformation differs significantly from the crystal conformation. GalaxyDock3 also compared favorably with other available docking programs on two benchmark tests that contained diverse ligand rings. The program is freely available at http://galaxy.seoklab.org/softwares/galaxydock.html . © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

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     

Investigation of MM-PBSA rescoring of docking poses

Target-based virtual screening is increasingly used to generate leads for targets for which high quality three-dimensional (3D) structures are available. To allow large molecular databases to be screened rapidly, a tiered scoring scheme is often employed whereby a simple scoring function is used as a fast filter of the entire database and a more rigorous and time-consuming scoring function is used to rescore the top hits to produce the final list of ranked compounds. Molecular mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann surface area (MM-PBSA) approaches are currently thought to be quite effective at incorporating implicit solvation into the estimation of ligand binding free energies. In this paper, the ability of a high-throughput MM-PBSA rescoring function to discriminate between correct and incorrect docking poses is investigated in detail. Various initial scoring functions are used to generate docked poses for a subset of the CCDC/Astex test set and to dock one set of actives/inactives from the DUD data set. The effectiveness of each of these initial scoring functions is discussed. Overall, the ability of the MM-PBSA rescoring function to (i) regenerate the set of X-ray complexes when docking the bound conformation of the ligand, (ii) regenerate the X-ray complexes when docking conformationally expanded databases for each ligand which include "conformation decoys" of the ligand, and (iii) enrich known actives in a virtual screen for the mineralocorticoid receptor in the presence of "ligand decoys" is assessed. While a pharmacophore-based molecular docking approach, PhDock, is used to carry out the docking, the results are expected to be general to use with any docking method.     

Simulation of conformational changes occurring when a protein interacts with its receptor

In order to simulate the conformational changes occurring when a protein interacts with its receptor, we firstly evaluated the structural differences between the experimental unbound and bound conformations for selected proteins and created theoretical complexes by replacing, in each experimental complex, the protein-bound with the protein-unbound chain. The theoretical models were then subjected to additional modeling refinements to improve the side chain geometry. Comparing the theoretical and experimental complexes in term of structural and energetic factors is resulted that the refined theoretical complexes became more similar to the experimental ones. We applied the same procedure within an homology modeling experiment, using as templates the experimental structures of human interleukin-1beta (IL-1beta) unbound and bound with its receptor, to build models of the homologous proteins from mouse and trout in unbound and bound conformations and to simulate the interaction with the related receptors. Our results suggest that homology modeling techniques are sensitive to differences between bound and unbound conformations, and that modeling with accuracy the side chains in the complex improves the interaction and molecular recognition. Moreover, our refinement procedure could be used in protein-protein interaction studies and, also, applied in conjunction with rigid-body docking when is not available the protein-bound conformation.     

针对蛋白质复合物Other类型的打分函数

在不同类型复合物结合界面的物理化学特征不同的基础上, 针对较难预测的Other 类型复合物设计出特异性打分函数, 用于在对接过程中挑选出有效结构. 该函数由原子接触能(EACE)、范德华和静电相互作用能组成,通过多元线性回归方法获得各项的权重系数. 对来自CAPRI benchmark1 中17 个Other 类复合物例子进行打分测试. 结果表明,组合打分能够刻画出Other 类型复合物单体间相互作用的特征, 反映出复合物形成前后的能量变化, 具备一定的从众多样本中筛选出有效结构的能力. 相对于残基成对势(RP), 该组合打分获得了更高的打分成功率. 对CAPRI 第八轮竞赛中两个结构预测模型进行打分排序, 该组合打分也体现出强于RP 的鉴别有效结合模式潜力.     

Scoring protein–protein docked structures based on the balance and tightness of binding

One main issue in protein-protein docking is to filter or score the putative docked structures. Unlike many popular scoring functions that are based on geometric and energetic complementarity, we present a set of scoring functions that are based on the consideration of local balance and tightness of binding of the docked structures. These scoring functions include the force and moment acting on one component (ligand) imposed by the other (receptor) and the second order spatial derivatives of protein-protein interaction potential. The scoring functions were applied to the docked structures of 19 test targets including enzyme/inhibitor, antibody/antigen and other classes of protein complexes. The results indicate that these scoring functions are also discriminative for the near-native conformation. For some cases, such as antibody/antigen, they show more discriminative efficiency than some other scoring functions, such as desolvation free energy (deltaG(des)) based on pairwise atom-atom contact energy (ACE). The correlation analyses between present scoring functions and the energetic functions also show that there is no clear correlation between them; therefore, the present scoring functions are not essentially the same as energy functions.     

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.     

Substantial improvements in large-scale redocking and screening using the novel HYDE scoring function

The HYDE scoring function consistently describes hydrogen bonding, the hydrophobic effect and desolvation. It relies on HYdration and DEsolvation terms which are calibrated using octanol/water partition coefficients of small molecules. We do not use affinity data for calibration, therefore HYDE is generally applicable to all protein targets. HYDE reflects the Gibbs free energy of binding while only considering the essential interactions of protein-ligand complexes. The greatest benefit of HYDE is that it yields a very intuitive atom-based score, which can be mapped onto the ligand and protein atoms. This allows the direct visualization of the score and consequently facilitates analysis of protein-ligand complexes during the lead optimization process. In this study, we validated our new scoring function by applying it in large-scale docking experiments. We could successfully predict the correct binding mode in 93% of complexes in redocking calculations on the Astex diverse set, while our performance in virtual screening experiments using the DUD dataset showed significant enrichment values with a mean AUC of 0.77 across all protein targets with little or no structural defects. As part of these studies, we also carried out a very detailed analysis of the data that revealed interesting pitfalls, which we highlight here and which should be addressed in future benchmark datasets.     

GalaxyTongDock: Symmetric and asymmetric ab initio protein–protein docking web server with improved energy parameters

Protein–protein docking methods are spotlighted for their roles in providing insights into protein–protein interactions in the absence of full structural information by experiment. GalaxyTongDock is an ab initio protein–protein docking web server that performs rigid-body docking just like ZDOCK but with improved energy parameters. The energy parameters were trained by iterative docking and parameter search so that more native-like structures are selected as top rankers. GalaxyTongDock performs asymmetric docking of two different proteins (GalaxyTongDock_A) and symmetric docking of homo-oligomeric proteins with C_n and D_n symmetries (GalaxyTongDock_C and GalaxyTongDock_D). Performance tests on an unbound docking benchmark set for asymmetric docking and a model docking benchmark set for symmetric docking showed that GalaxyTongDock is better or comparable to other state-of-the-art methods. Experimental and/or evolutionary information on binding interfaces can be easily incorporated by using block and interface options. GalaxyTongDock web server is freely available at http://galaxy.seoklab.org/tongdock . © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

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.     

Flexible protein‐protein docking based on Best‐First search algorithm

We developed a new high resolution protein‐protein docking method based on Best‐First search algorithm that loosely imitates protein‐protein associations. The method operates in two stages: first, we perform a rigid search on the unbound proteins. Second, we search alternately on rigid and flexible degrees of freedom starting from multiple configurations from the rigid search. Both stages use heuristics added to the energy function, which causes the proteins to rapidly approach each other and remain adjacent, while optimizing on the energy. The method deals with backbone flexibility explicitly by searching over ensembles of conformations generated before docking. We ran the rigid docking stage on 66 complexes and grouped the results into four classes according to evaluation criteria used in Critical Assessment of Predicted Interactions (CAPRI; “high,” “medium,” “acceptable,” and “incorrect”). Our method found medium binding conformations for 26% of the complexes and acceptable for additional 44% among the top 10 configurations. Considering all the configurations, we found medium binding conformations for 55% of the complexes and acceptable for additional 39% of the complexes. Introducing side‐chains flexibility in the second stage improves the best found binding conformation but harms the ranking. However, introducing side‐chains and backbone flexibility improve both the best found binding conformation and the best found conformation in the top 10. Our approach is a basis for incorporating multiple flexible motions into protein‐protein docking and is of interest even with the current use of a simple energy function. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem, 2010