Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 5. Improved docking performance using high solute dielectric constant MM/GBSA and MM/PBSA rescoring
- PMID: 25205360
- DOI: 10.1039/c4cp03179b
Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 5. Improved docking performance using high solute dielectric constant MM/GBSA and MM/PBSA rescoring
Abstract
With the rapid development of computational techniques and hardware, more rigorous and precise theoretical models have been used to predict the binding affinities of a large number of small molecules to biomolecules. By employing continuum solvation models, the MM/GBSA and MM/PBSA methodologies achieve a good balance between low computational cost and reasonable prediction accuracy. In this study, we have thoroughly investigated the effects of interior dielectric constant, molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and the number of top-scored docking poses on the performance of the MM/GBSA and MM/PBSA rescoring of docking poses for three tyrosine kinases, including ABL, ALK, and BRAF. Overall, the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA rescoring achieved comparative accuracies based on a relatively higher solute (or interior) dielectric constant (i.e. ε = 2, or 4), and could markedly improve the 'screening power' and 'ranking power' given by Autodock. Moreover, with a relatively higher solute dielectric constant, the MM/PBSA or MM/GBSA rescoring based on the best scored docking poses and the multiple top-scored docking poses gave similar predictions, implying that much computational cost can be saved by considering the best scored docking poses only. Besides, compared with the rescoring based on the minimized structures, the rescoring based on the MD simulations might not be completely necessary due to its negligible impact on the docking performance. Considering the much higher computational demand of MM/PBSA, MM/GBSA with a high solute dielectric constant (ε = 2 or 4) is recommended for the virtual screening of tyrosine kinases.
Similar articles
-
Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 6. Capability to predict protein-protein binding free energies and re-rank binding poses generated by protein-protein docking.Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2016 Aug 10;18(32):22129-39. doi: 10.1039/c6cp03670h. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2016. PMID: 27444142
-
Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 9. Prediction reliability of binding affinities and binding poses for protein-peptide complexes.Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2019 May 15;21(19):10135-10145. doi: 10.1039/c9cp01674k. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2019. PMID: 31062799
-
Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 4. Accuracies of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methodologies evaluated by various simulation protocols using PDBbind data set.Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2014 Aug 21;16(31):16719-29. doi: 10.1039/c4cp01388c. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2014. PMID: 24999761
-
The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities.Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2015 May;10(5):449-61. doi: 10.1517/17460441.2015.1032936. Epub 2015 Apr 2. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2015. PMID: 25835573 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Application of MM-PBSA Methods in Virtual Screening.Molecules. 2020 Apr 23;25(8):1971. doi: 10.3390/molecules25081971. Molecules. 2020. PMID: 32340232 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Conformational States of the GDP- and GTP-Bound HRAS Affected by A59E and K117R: An Exploration from Gaussian Accelerated Molecular Dynamics.Molecules. 2024 Jan 30;29(3):645. doi: 10.3390/molecules29030645. Molecules. 2024. PMID: 38338389 Free PMC article.
-
Substitution Models of Protein Evolution with Selection on Enzymatic Activity.Mol Biol Evol. 2024 Feb 1;41(2):msae026. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msae026. Mol Biol Evol. 2024. PMID: 38314876 Free PMC article.
-
Using deep learning and molecular dynamics simulations to unravel the regulation mechanism of peptides as noncompetitive inhibitor of xanthine oxidase.Sci Rep. 2024 Jan 2;14(1):174. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-50686-0. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 38168773 Free PMC article.
-
Binding selectivity analysis of AURKs inhibitors through molecular dynamics simulation studies.PLoS One. 2023 Dec 19;18(12):e0295741. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295741. eCollection 2023. PLoS One. 2023. PMID: 38113210 Free PMC article.
-
Molecular determinants of antagonist interactions with chemokine receptors CCR2 and CCR5.bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2024 Feb 12:2023.11.15.567150. doi: 10.1101/2023.11.15.567150. bioRxiv. 2024. PMID: 38014122 Free PMC article. Preprint.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
