Challenges, Applications, and Recent Advances of Protein-ligand Docking in Structure-based Drug Design

Overview

Journal Molecules

Publisher MDPI

Specialty Biology

Date 2014 Jul 15

PMID 25019558

Citations 69

Authors

Sam Z Grinter

Xiaoqin Zou

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The docking methods used in structure-based virtual database screening offer the ability to quickly and cheaply estimate the affinity and binding mode of a ligand for the protein receptor of interest, such as a drug target. These methods can be used to enrich a database of compounds, so that more compounds that are subsequently experimentally tested are found to be pharmaceutically interesting. In addition, like all virtual screening methods used for drug design, structure-based virtual screening can focus on curated libraries of synthesizable compounds, helping to reduce the expense of subsequent experimental verification. In this review, we introduce the protein-ligand docking methods used for structure-based drug design and other biological applications. We discuss the fundamental challenges facing these methods and some of the current methodological topics of interest. We also discuss the main approaches for applying protein-ligand docking methods. We end with a discussion of the challenging aspects of evaluating or benchmarking the accuracy of docking methods for their improvement, and discuss future directions.

Citing Articles

In silico screening of protein-binding peptides with an application to developing peptide inhibitors against antibiotic resistance.

Xu X, Kao W, Wang A, Lee H, Duan R, Holmes H PNAS Nexus. 2024; 3(12):pgae541.

PMID: 39660074 PMC: 11630551. DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae541.

Evaluation of the Antibacterial and Antioxidant Properties of Chemical Constituents of the Roots of : An Integrated Approach of Experimental and Computational Study.

Abera B, Abdissa N, Endale M, Melaku Y, Shenkute K, Ensermu U Biochem Res Int. 2024; 2024:1322756.

PMID: 39659700 PMC: 11631344. DOI: 10.1155/bri/1322756.

An In Silico Approach to Discover Efficient Natural Inhibitors to Tie Up Epstein-Barr Virus Infection.

Das A, Mumu M, Rahman T, Sayeed M, Islam M, Alawneh J Pathogens. 2024; 13(11).

PMID: 39599481 PMC: 11597430. DOI: 10.3390/pathogens13110928.

Docking strategies for predicting protein-ligand interactions and their application to structure-based drug design.

Ma Z, Ajibade A, Zou X Commun Inf Syst. 2024; 24(3):199-230.

PMID: 39584017 PMC: 11583305. DOI: 10.4310/cis.241021221101.

Improved Prediction of Ligand-Protein Binding Affinities by Meta-modeling.

Lee H, Emani P, Gerstein M J Chem Inf Model. 2024; 64(23):8684-8704.

PMID: 39576762 PMC: 11632770. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.4c01116.

References

Allen W, Rizzo R . Implementation of the Hungarian algorithm to account for ligand symmetry and similarity in structure-based design. J Chem Inf Model. 2014; 54(2):518-29. PMC: 3958141. DOI: 10.1021/ci400534h. View

Erickson J, Jalaie M, Robertson D, Lewis R, Vieth M . Lessons in molecular recognition: the effects of ligand and protein flexibility on molecular docking accuracy. J Med Chem. 2003; 47(1):45-55. DOI: 10.1021/jm030209y. View

Lyne P . Structure-based virtual screening: an overview. Drug Discov Today. 2003; 7(20):1047-55. DOI: 10.1016/s1359-6446(02)02483-2. View

Huang S, Zou X . Inclusion of solvation and entropy in the knowledge-based scoring function for protein-ligand interactions. J Chem Inf Model. 2010; 50(2):262-73. PMC: 3199178. DOI: 10.1021/ci9002987. View

Anderson A . The process of structure-based drug design. Chem Biol. 2003; 10(9):787-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2003.09.002. View

Srinivasan J, Miller J, Kollman P, Case D . Continuum solvent studies of the stability of RNA hairpin loops and helices. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 1999; 16(3):671-82. DOI: 10.1080/07391102.1998.10508279. View

Huggins D, Tidor B . Systematic placement of structural water molecules for improved scoring of protein-ligand interactions. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2011; 24(10):777-89. PMC: 3170077. DOI: 10.1093/protein/gzr036. View

Thomas P, Dill K . Statistical potentials extracted from protein structures: how accurate are they?. J Mol Biol. 1996; 257(2):457-69. DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1996.0175. View

Huang S, Zou X . An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: II. Validation of the scoring function. J Comput Chem. 2006; 27(15):1876-82. DOI: 10.1002/jcc.20505. View

10.

Tanaka S, Scheraga H . Model of protein folding: incorporation of a one-dimensional short-range (Ising) model into a three-dimensional model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1977; 74(4):1320-3. PMC: 430739. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.74.4.1320. View

11.

Wang C, Bradley P, Baker D . Protein-protein docking with backbone flexibility. J Mol Biol. 2007; 373(2):503-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2007.07.050. View

12.

Moustakas D, Lang P, Pegg S, Pettersen E, Kuntz I, Brooijmans N . Development and validation of a modular, extensible docking program: DOCK 5. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2006; 20(10-11):601-19. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-006-9060-4. View

13.

Wang J, Wolf R, Caldwell J, Kollman P, Case D . Development and testing of a general amber force field. J Comput Chem. 2004; 25(9):1157-74. DOI: 10.1002/jcc.20035. View

14.

Rahaman O, Estrada T, Doren D, Taufer M, Brooks 3rd C, Armen R . Evaluation of several two-step scoring functions based on linear interaction energy, effective ligand size, and empirical pair potentials for prediction of protein-ligand binding geometry and free energy. J Chem Inf Model. 2011; 51(9):2047-65. PMC: 3183351. DOI: 10.1021/ci1003009. View

15.

Hawkins P, Nicholls A . Conformer generation with OMEGA: learning from the data set and the analysis of failures. J Chem Inf Model. 2012; 52(11):2919-36. DOI: 10.1021/ci300314k. View

16.

Schneider G, Bohm H . Virtual screening and fast automated docking methods. Drug Discov Today. 2002; 7(1):64-70. DOI: 10.1016/s1359-6446(01)02091-8. View

17.

Terp G, Johansen B, Christensen I, Jorgensen F . A new concept for multidimensional selection of ligand conformations (MultiSelect) and multidimensional scoring (MultiScore) of protein-ligand binding affinities. J Med Chem. 2001; 44(14):2333-43. DOI: 10.1021/jm001090l. View

18.

Caroli A, Ballante F, Wickersham 3rd R, Corelli F, Ragno R . Hsp90 inhibitors, part 2: combining ligand-based and structure-based approaches for virtual screening application. J Chem Inf Model. 2014; 54(3):970-7. PMC: 3985681. DOI: 10.1021/ci400760a. View

19.

Wilson G, Lill M . Integrating structure-based and ligand-based approaches for computational drug design. Future Med Chem. 2011; 3(6):735-50. DOI: 10.4155/fmc.11.18. View

20.

Kumar A, Zhang K . Computational fragment-based screening using RosettaLigand: the SAMPL3 challenge. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2012; 26(5):603-16. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-011-9523-0. View