Tyler Day

Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments.

Structure-based virtual screening plays an important role in drug discovery and complements other screening approaches. In general, protein crystal structures are prepared prior to docking in order to add hydrogen atoms, optimize hydrogen bonds, remove atomic clashes, and perform other operations that are not part of the x-ray crystal structure refinement process. In addition, ligands must be prepared to create 3-dimensional geometries, assign proper bond orders, and generate accessible tautomer and ionization states prior to virtual screening. While the prerequisite for proper system preparation is generally accepted in the field, an extensive study of the preparation steps and their effect on virtual screening enrichments has not been performed. In this work, we systematically explore each of the steps involved in preparing a system for virtual screening. We first explore a large number of parameters using the Glide validation set of 36 crystal structures and 1,000 decoys. We then apply a subset of protocols to the DUD database. We show that database enrichment is improved with proper preparation and that neglecting certain steps of the preparation process produces a systematic degradation in enrichments, which can be large for some targets. We provide examples illustrating the structural changes introduced by the preparation that impact database enrichment. While the work presented here was performed with the Protein Preparation Wizard and Glide, the insights and guidance are expected to be generalizable to structure-based virtual screening with other docking methods.

A hierarchical approach to all-atom protein loop prediction

The application of all‐atom force fields (and explicit or implicit solvent models) to protein homology‐modeling tasks such as side‐chain and loop prediction remains challenging both because of the expense of the individual energy calculations and because of the difficulty of sampling the rugged all‐atom energy surface. Here we address this challenge for the problem of loop prediction through the development of numerous new algorithms, with an emphasis on multiscale and hierarchical techniques. As a first step in evaluating the performance of our loop prediction algorithm, we have applied it to the problem of reconstructing loops in native structures; we also explicitly include crystal packing to provide a fair comparison with crystal structures. In brief, large numbers of loops are generated by using a dihedral angle‐based buildup procedure followed by iterative cycles of clustering, side‐chain optimization, and complete energy minimization of selected loop structures. We evaluate this method by using the largest test set yet used for validation of a loop prediction method, with a total of 833 loops ranging from 4 to 12 residues in length. Average/median backbone root‐mean‐square deviations (RMSDs) to the native structures (superimposing the body of the protein, not the loop itself) are 0.42/0.24 Å for 5 residue loops, 1.00/0.44 Å for 8 residue loops, and 2.47/1.83 Å for 11 residue loops. Median RMSDs are substantially lower than the averages because of a small number of outliers; the causes of these failures are examined in some detail, and many can be attributed to errors in assignment of protonation states of titratable residues, omission of ligands from the simulation, and, in a few cases, probable errors in the experimentally determined structures. When these obvious problems in the data sets are filtered out, average RMSDs to the native structures improve to 0.43 Å for 5 residue loops, 0.84 Å for 8 residue loops, and 1.63 Å for 11 residue loops. In the vast majority of cases, the method locates energy minima that are lower than or equal to that of the minimized native loop, thus indicating that sampling rarely limits prediction accuracy. The overall results are, to our knowledge, the best reported to date, and we attribute this success to the combination of an accurate all‐atom energy function, efficient methods for loop buildup and side‐chain optimization, and, especially for the longer loops, the hierarchical refinement protocol. Proteins 2004;55:000–000.

Docking Covalent Inhibitors: A Parameter Free Approach To Pose Prediction and Scoring

Although many popular docking programs include a facility to account for covalent ligands, large-scale systematic docking validation studies of covalent inhibitors have been sparse. In this paper, we present the development and validation of a novel approach for docking and scoring covalent inhibitors, which consists of conventional noncovalent docking, heuristic formation of the covalent attachment point, and structural refinement of the protein-ligand complex. This approach combines the strengths of the docking program Glide and the protein structure modeling program Prime and does not require any parameter fitting for the study of additional covalent reaction types. We first test this method by predicting the native binding geometry of 38 covalently bound complexes. The average RMSD of the predicted poses is 1.52 Å, and 76% of test set inhibitors have an RMSD of less than 2.0 Å. In addition, the apparent affinity score constructed herein is tested on a virtual screening study and the characterization of the SAR properties of two different series of congeneric compounds with satisfactory success.

Antibody structure determination using a combination of homology modeling, energy‐based refinement, and loop prediction

We present the blinded prediction results in the Second Antibody Modeling Assessment (AMA‐II) using a fully automatic antibody structure prediction method implemented in the programs BioLuminate and Prime. We have developed a novel knowledge based approach to model the CDR loops, using a combination of sequence similarity, geometry matching, and the clustering of database structures. The homology models are further optimized with a physics‐based energy function (VSGB2.0), which improves the model quality significantly. H3 loop modeling remains the most challenging task. Our ab initio loop prediction performs well for the H3 loop in the crystal structure context, and allows improved results when refining the H3 loops in the context of homology models. For the 10 human and mouse derived antibodies in this assessment, the average RMSDs for the homology model Fv and framework regions are 1.19 Å and 0.74 Å, respectively. The average RMSDs for five non‐H3 CDR loops range from 0.61 Å to 1.05 Å, and the H3 loop average RMSD is 2.91 Å using our knowledge‐based loop prediction approach. The ab initio H3 loop predictions yield an average RMSD of 1.28 Å when performed in the context of the crystal structure and 2.67 Å in the context of the homology modeled structure. Notably, our method for predicting the H3 loop in the crystal structure environment ranked first among the seven participating groups in AMA‐II, and our method made the best prediction among all participants for seven of the ten targets. Proteins 2014; 82:1646–1655.

Ab initio structure prediction of the antibody hypervariable H3 loop

Antibodies have the capability of binding a wide range of antigens due to the diversity of the six loops constituting the complementarity determining region (CDR). Among the six loops, the H3 loop is the most diverse in structure, length, and sequence identity. Prediction of the three‐dimensional structures of antibodies, especially the CDR loops, is an important step in the computational design and engineering of novel antibodies for improved affinity and specificity. Although it has been demonstrated that the conformation of the five non‐H3 loops can be accurately predicted by comparing their sequences against databases of canonical loop conformations, no such connection has been established for H3 loops. In this work, we present the results for ab initio structure prediction of the H3 loop using conformational sampling and energy calculations with the program Prime on a dataset of 53 loops ranging in length from 4 to 22 residues. When the prediction is performed in the crystal environment and including symmetry mates, the median backbone root mean square deviation (RMSD) is 0.5 Å to the crystal structure, with 91% of cases having an RMSD of less than 2.0 Å. When the prediction is performed in a noncrystallographic environment, where the scaffold is constructed by swapping the H3 loops between homologous antibodies, 70% of cases have an RMSD below 2.0 Å. These results show promise for ab initio loop predictions applied to modeling of antibodies.

Improving Accuracy, Diversity, and Speed with Prime Macrocycle Conformational Sampling

A novel method for exploring macrocycle conformational space, Prime macrocycle conformational sampling (Prime-MCS), is introduced and evaluated in the context of other available algorithms (Molecular Dynamics, LowModeMD in MOE, and MacroModel Baseline Search). The algorithms were benchmarked on a data set of 208 macrocycles which was curated for diversity from the Cambridge Structural Database, the Protein Data Bank, and the Biologically Interesting Molecule Reference Dictionary. The algorithms were evaluated in terms of accuracy (ability to reproduce the crystal structure), diversity (coverage of conformational space), and computational speed. Prime-MCS most reliably reproduced crystallographic structures for RMSD thresholds >1.0 Å, most often produced the most diverse conformational ensemble, and was most often the fastest algorithm. Detailed analysis and examination of both typical and outlier cases were performed to reveal characteristics, shortcomings, expected performance, and complementarity of the methods.

qFit-ligand reveals widespread conformational heterogeneity of drug-like molecules in X-ray electron density maps

Proteins and ligands sample a conformational ensemble that governs molecular recognition, activity, and dissociation. In structure-based drug design, access to this conformational ensemble is critical to understand the balance between entropy and enthalpy in lead optimization. However, ligand conformational heterogeneity is currently severely underreported in crystal structures in the Protein Data Bank, owing in part to a lack of automated and unbiased procedures to model an ensemble of protein-ligand states into X-ray data. Here, we designed a computational method, qFit-ligand, to automatically resolve conformationally averaged ligand heterogeneity in crystal structures, and applied it to a large set of protein receptor-ligand complexes. We found that up to 29 % of a dataset of protein crystal structures bound with drug-like molecules present evidence of unmodeled, averaged, relatively isoenergetic conformations in ligand-receptor interactions. In many retrospective cases, these alternate conformations were adventitiously exploited to guide compound design, resulting in improved potency or selectivity. Combining qFit-ligand with high-throughput screening or multi-temperature crystallography could therefore augment the structure-based drug design toolbox.

AggScore: Prediction of aggregation-prone regions in proteins based on the distribution of surface patches

Protein aggregation is a phenomenon that has attracted considerable attention within the pharmaceutical industry from both a developability standpoint (to ensure stability of protein formulations) and from a research perspective for neurodegenerative diseases. Experimental identification of aggregation behavior in proteins can be expensive; and hence, the development of accurate computational approaches is crucial. The existing methods for predicting protein aggregation rely mostly on the primary sequence and are typically trained on amyloid‐like proteins. However, the training bias toward beta amyloid peptides may worsen prediction accuracy of such models when applied to larger protein systems. Here, we present a novel algorithm to identify aggregation‐prone regions in proteins termed “AggScore” that is based entirely on three‐dimensional structure input. The method uses the distribution of hydrophobic and electrostatic patches on the surface of the protein, factoring in the intensity and relative orientation of the respective surface patches into an aggregation propensity function that has been trained on a benchmark set of 31 adnectin proteins. AggScore can accurately identify aggregation‐prone regions in several well‐studied proteins and also reliably predict changes in aggregation behavior upon residue mutation. The method is agnostic to an amyloid‐specific aggregation context and thus may be applied to globular proteins, small peptides and antibodies.