应用机器学习方法构建药物分子解离速率常数的预测模型

越来越多的研究表明:药物分子与靶标分子的结合动力学性质与其在体内的药效有很强的相关性。因此,以改善结合动力学性质为导向的分子设计为药物研发提供了新的思路。本工作的研究目标在于得出预测药物分子解离速率常数(koff)的通用型定量结构-动力学关系(QSKR)模型。我们从文献中收集了406个配体分子的解离速率常数实验值,采用分子模拟方法构建了所有配体与靶蛋白复合物的三维结构模型。然后基于蛋白-配体原子对描述符,采用随机森林算法来构建预测配体分子解离速率常数的QSKR模型。通过探索不同条件(如距离区间,划分区间宽度和特征选择标准)下产生的描述符集合对模型预测精度的影响,确定当采用距离阈值为15?、划分区间宽度为3?、特征选择方差水平为2时得到的QSKR模型为最优,在两个独立测试集上获得良好的预测精度(相关系数为0.62)。本工作对预测药物分子解离速率常数这一关键科学问题进行了有益的探索,可为后续研究提供思路。     

An extensive test of 14 scoring functions using the PDBbind refined set of 800 protein-ligand complexes

Fourteen popular scoring functions, i.e., X-Score, DrugScore, five scoring functions in the Sybyl software (D-Score, PMF-Score, G-Score, ChemScore, and F-Score), four scoring functions in the Cerius2 software (LigScore, PLP, PMF, and LUDI), two scoring functions in the GOLD program (GoldScore and ChemScore), and HINT, were tested on the refined set of the PDBbind database, a set of 800 diverse protein-ligand complexes with high-resolution crystal structures and experimentally determined Ki or Kd values. The focus of our study was to assess the ability of these scoring functions to predict binding affinities based on the experimentally determined high-resolution crystal structures of proteins in complex with their ligands. The quantitative correlation between the binding scores produced by each scoring function and the known binding constants of the 800 complexes was computed. X-Score, DrugScore, Sybyl::ChemScore, and Cerius2::PLP provided better correlations than the other scoring functions with standard deviations of 1.8-2.0 log units. These four scoring functions were also found to be robust enough to carry out computation directly on unaltered crystal structures. To examine how well scoring functions predict the binding affinities for ligands bound to the same target protein, the performance of these 14 scoring functions were evaluated on three subsets of protein-ligand complexes from the test set: HIV-1 protease complexes (82 entries), trypsin complexes (45 entries), and carbonic anhydrase II complexes (40 entries). Although the results for the HIV-1 protease subset are less than desirable, several scoring functions are able to satisfactorily predict the binding affinities for the trypsin and the carbonic anhydrase II subsets with standard deviation as low as 1.0 log unit (corresponding to 1.3-1.4 kcal/mol at room temperature). Our results demonstrate the strengths as well as the weaknesses of current scoring functions for binding affinity prediction.     

An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: II. Validation of the scoring function

We have developed an iterative knowledge-based scoring function (ITScore) to describe protein-ligand interactions. Here, we assess ITScore through extensive tests on native structure identification, binding affinity prediction, and virtual database screening. Specifically, ITScore was first applied to a test set of 100 protein-ligand complexes constructed by Wang et al. (J Med Chem 2003, 46, 2287), and compared with 14 other scoring functions. The results show that ITScore yielded a high success rate of 82% on identifying native-like binding modes under the criterion of rmsd < or = 2 A for each top-ranked ligand conformation. The success rate increased to 98% if the top five conformations were considered for each ligand. In the case of binding affinity prediction, ITScore also obtained a good correlation for this test set (R = 0.65). Next, ITScore was used to predict binding affinities of a second diverse test set of 77 protein-ligand complexes prepared by Muegge and Martin (J Med Chem 1999, 42, 791), and compared with four other widely used knowledge-based scoring functions. ITScore yielded a high correlation of R2 = 0.65 (or R = 0.81) in the affinity prediction. Finally, enrichment tests were performed with ITScore against four target proteins using the compound databases constructed by Jacobsson et al. (J Med Chem 2003, 46, 5781). The results were compared with those of eight other scoring functions. ITScore yielded high enrichments in all four database screening tests. ITScore can be easily combined with the existing docking programs for the use of structure-based drug design.     

Statistical potential for modeling and ranking of protein-ligand interactions

Applications in structural biology and medicinal chemistry require protein-ligand scoring functions for two distinct tasks: (i) ranking different poses of a small molecule in a protein binding site and (ii) ranking different small molecules by their complementarity to a protein site. Using probability theory, we developed two atomic distance-dependent statistical scoring functions: PoseScore was optimized for recognizing native binding geometries of ligands from other poses and RankScore was optimized for distinguishing ligands from nonbinding molecules. Both scores are based on a set of 8,885 crystallographic structures of protein-ligand complexes but differ in the values of three key parameters. Factors influencing the accuracy of scoring were investigated, including the maximal atomic distance and non-native ligand geometries used for scoring, as well as the use of protein models instead of crystallographic structures for training and testing the scoring function. For the test set of 19 targets, RankScore improved the ligand enrichment (logAUC) and early enrichment (EF(1)) scores computed by DOCK 3.6 for 13 and 14 targets, respectively. In addition, RankScore performed better at rescoring than each of seven other scoring functions tested. Accepting both the crystal structure and decoy geometries with all-atom root-mean-square errors of up to 2 ? from the crystal structure as correct binding poses, PoseScore gave the best score to a correct binding pose among 100 decoys for 88% of all cases in a benchmark set containing 100 protein-ligand complexes. PoseScore accuracy is comparable to that of DrugScore(CSD) and ITScore/SE and superior to 12 other tested scoring functions. Therefore, RankScore can facilitate ligand discovery, by ranking complexes of the target with different small molecules; PoseScore can be used for protein-ligand complex structure prediction, by ranking different conformations of a given protein-ligand pair. The statistical potentials are available through the Integrative Modeling Platform (IMP) software package (http://salilab.org/imp) and the LigScore Web server (http://salilab.org/ligscore/).     

AIScore chemically diverse empirical scoring function employing quantum chemical binding energies of hydrogen-bonded complexes

In this work we report on a novel scoring function that is based on the LUDI model and focuses on the prediction of binding affinities. AIScore extends the original FlexX scoring function using a chemically diverse set of hydrogen-bonded interactions derived from extensive quantum chemical ab initio calculations. Furthermore, we introduce an algorithmic extension for the treatment of multifurcated hydrogen bonds (XFurcate). Charged and resonance-assisted hydrogen bond energies and hydrophobic interactions as well as a scaling factor for implicit solvation were fitted to experimental data. To this end, we assembled a set of 101 protein-ligand complexes with known experimental binding affinities. Tightly bound water molecules in the active site were considered to be an integral part of the binding pocket. Compared to the original FlexX scoring function, AIScore significantly improves the prediction of the binding free energies of the complexes in their native crystal structures. In combination with XFurcate, AIScore yields a Pearson correlation coefficient of R P = 0.87 on the training set. In a validation run on the PDBbind test set we achieved an R P value of 0.46 for 799 attractively scored complexes, compared to a value of R P = 0.17 and 739 bound complexes obtained with the FlexX original scoring function. The redocking capability of AIScore, on the other hand, does not fully reach the good performance of the original FlexX scoring function. This finding suggests that AIScore should rather be used for postscoring in combination with the standard FlexX incremental ligand construction scheme.