Abstract
We describe binding free energy calculations in the D3R Grand Challenge 2015 for blind prediction of the binding affinities of 180 ligands to Hsp90. The present D3R challenge was built around experimental datasets involving Heat shock protein (Hsp) 90, an ATP-dependent molecular chaperone which is an important anticancer drug target. The Hsp90 ATP binding site is known to be a challenging target for accurate calculations of ligand binding affinities because of the ligand-dependent conformational changes in the binding site, the presence of ordered waters and the broad chemical diversity of ligands that can bind at this site. Our primary focus here is to distinguish binders from nonbinders. Large scale absolute binding free energy calculations that cover over 3000 protein–ligand complexes were performed using the BEDAM method starting from docked structures generated by Glide docking. Although the ligand dataset in this study resembles an intermediate to late stage lead optimization project while the BEDAM method is mainly developed for early stage virtual screening of hit molecules, the BEDAM binding free energy scoring has resulted in a moderate enrichment of ligand screening against this challenging drug target. Results show that, using a statistical mechanics based free energy method like BEDAM starting from docked poses offers better enrichment than classical docking scoring functions and rescoring methods like Prime MM-GBSA for the Hsp90 data set in this blind challenge. Importantly, among the three methods tested here, only the mean value of the BEDAM binding free energy scores is able to separate the large group of binders from the small group of nonbinders with a gap of 2.4 kcal/mol. None of the three methods that we have tested provided accurate ranking of the affinities of the 147 active compounds. We discuss the possible sources of errors in the binding free energy calculations. The study suggests that BEDAM can be used strategically to discriminate binders from nonbinders in virtual screening and to more accurately predict the ligand binding modes prior to the more computationally expensive FEP calculations of binding affinity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boresch S, Tettinger F, Leitgeb M, Karplus M (2003) Absolute binding free energies: a quantitative approach for their calculation. J Phys Chem 107:9535–9551
Chang C-E, Gilson MK (2004) Free energy, entropy, and induced fit in host-guest recognition: calculations with the second-generation mining minima algorithm. J Am Chem Soc 126:13156–13164
Deng Y, Roux B (2006) Calculation of standard binding free energies: aromatic molecules in the T4 lysozyme L99A mutant. J Chem Theory Comput 2:1255–1273
Gallicchio E, Lapelosa M, Levy RM (2010) Binding energy distribution analysis method (BEDAM) for estimation of protein–ligand binding affinities. J Chem Theory Comput 6:2961–2977
Wang L, Friesner RA, Berne BJ (2011) Replica exchange with solute scaling: a more efficient version of replica exchange with solute tempering (REST2). J Phys Chem B 115:9431–9438
Wang L et al (2015) Accurate and reliable prediction of relative ligand binding potency in prospective drug discovery by way of a modern free-energy calculation protocol and force field. J Am Chem Soc 137:2695–2703
Mobley DL et al (2014) Blind prediction of HIV integrase binding from the SAMPL4 challenge. J Comput Aided Mol Des 28:327–345
Gallicchio E, Levy RM (2012) Prediction of SAMPL3 host-guest affinities with the binding energy distribution analysis method (BEDAM). J Comput Aided Mol Des 26:505–516
Gallicchio E et al (2014) Virtual screening of integrase inhibitors by large scale binding free energy calculations: the SAMPL4 challenge. J Comput Aided Mol Des 28:475–490
Gallicchio E et al (2015) BEDAM binding free energy predictions for the SAMPL4 octa-acid host challenge. J Comput Aided Mol Des 29:315–325
Mentes A et al (2016) Binding energy distribution analysis method (BEDAM): Hamiltonian replica exchange with torsional flattening for binding mode prediction and binding free energy estimation. J Chem Theory Comput 12:2459–2470
Murray CW et al (2010) Fragment-based drug discovery applied to Hsp90. discovery of two lead series with high ligand efficiency. J Med Chem 53:5942–5955
Steinbrecher TB et al (2015) Accurate binding free energy predictions in fragment optimization. J Chem Inf Model 55:2411–2420
Haider K, Huggins DJ (2013) Combining solvent thermodynamic profiles with functionality maps of the Hsp90 binding site to predict the displacement of water molecules. J Chem Inf Model 53:2571–2586
Deng N et al (2014) Distinguishing binders from false positives by free energy calculations: fragment screening against the flap site of HIV protease. J Phys Chem B 119:976–988
Jorgensen WL, Maxwell DS, Tirado-Rives J (1996) Development and testing of the OPLS all-atom force field on conformational energetics and properties of organic liquids. J Am Chem Soc 118:11225–11236
Kaminski GA, Friesner RA, Tirado-Rives J, Jorgensen WL (2001) Evaluation and reparametrization of the OPLS-AA force field for proteins via comparison with accurate quantum chemical calculations on peptides. J Phys Chem B 105:6474–6487
Gallicchio E, Levy RM (2004) AGBNP: An analytic implicit solvent model suitable for molecular dynamics simulations and high-resolution modeling. J Comput Chem 25:479–499
Gallicchio E, Paris K, Levy RM (2009) The AGBNP2 implicit solvation model. J Chem Theory Comput 5:2544–2564
Gilson M, Given J, Bush B, Mccammon J (1997) The statistical-thermodynamic basis for computation of binding affinities: a critical review. Biophys J 72:1047–1069
Deng Y, Roux B (2009) Computations of standard binding free energies with molecular dynamics simulations. J Phys Chem B 113:2234–2246
Deng N, Zhang P, Cieplak P, Lai L (2011) Elucidating the energetics of entropically driven protein–ligand association: calculations of absolute binding free energy and entropy. J Phys Chem B 115:11902–11910
Lindorff-Larsen K et al (2010) Improved side-chain torsion potentials for the Amber ff99SB protein force field. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf 78:1950–1958
Wang J, Wolf RM, Caldwell JW, Kollman PA, Case DA (2004) Development and testing of a general amber force field. J Comput Chem 25:1157–1174
Jakalian A, Bush BL, Jack DB, Bayly CI (2000) Fast, efficient generation of high-quality atomic charges. AM1-BCC model: I. Method. J Comput Chem 21:132–146
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by the R01 GM30580 to RML, and by the NIH S10 OD020095 (cb2rr Shared Instrumentation Grant. Part of the free energy calculations were performed using NSF XSEDE computing resources. Parallel BEDAM calculations were also carried out on the BOINC distributed networks at Temple University and Brooklyn College of the City University of New York. The authors acknowledge invaluable technical support from Gene Mayro, Jaykeen Holt, Zachary Hanson-Hart from the IT department at Temple University, and James Roman, and John Stephen at Brooklyn College.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Deng, N., Flynn, W.F., Xia, J. et al. Large scale free energy calculations for blind predictions of protein–ligand binding: the D3R Grand Challenge 2015. J Comput Aided Mol Des 30, 743–751 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-016-9952-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-016-9952-x