Optimizing the affinity and specificity of ligand binding with the inclusion of solvation effect

Solvation effect is an important factor for protein–ligand binding in aqueous water. Previous scoring function of protein–ligand interactions rarely incorporates the solvation model into the quantification of protein–ligand interactions, mainly due to the immense computational cost, especially in the structure‐based virtual screening, and nontransferable application of independently optimized atomic solvation parameters. In order to overcome these barriers, we effectively combine knowledge‐based atom–pair potentials and the atomic solvation energy of charge‐independent implicit solvent model in the optimization of binding affinity and specificity. The resulting scoring functions with optimized atomic solvation parameters is named as specificity and affinity with solvation effect (SPA‐SE). The performance of SPA‐SE is evaluated and compared to 20 other scoring functions, as well as SPA. The comparative results show that SPA‐SE outperforms all other scoring functions in binding affinity prediction and “native” pose identification. Our optimization validates that solvation effect is an important regulator to the stability and specificity of protein–ligand binding. The development strategy of SPA‐SE sets an example for other scoring function to account for the solvation effect in biomolecular recognitions. Proteins 2015; 83:1632–1642. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Surface shapes and surrounding environment analysis of single‐ and double‐stranded DNA‐binding proteins in protein‐DNA interface

Protein‐DNA bindings are critical to many biological processes. However, the structural mechanisms underlying these interactions are not fully understood. Here, we analyzed the residues shape (peak, flat, or valley) and the surrounding environment of double‐stranded DNA‐binding proteins (DSBs) and single‐stranded DNA‐binding proteins (SSBs) in protein‐DNA interfaces. In the results, we found that the interface shapes, hydrogen bonds, and the surrounding environment present significant differences between the two kinds of proteins. Built on the investigation results, we constructed a random forest (RF) classifier to distinguish DSBs and SSBs with satisfying performance. In conclusion, we present a novel methodology to characterize protein interfaces, which will deepen our understanding of the specificity of proteins binding to ssDNA (single‐stranded DNA) or dsDNA (double‐stranded DNA). Proteins 2016; 84:979–989. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Protein–protein structure prediction by scoring molecular dynamics trajectories of putative poses

The prediction of protein–protein interactions and their structural configuration remains a largely unsolved problem. Most of the algorithms aimed at finding the native conformation of a protein complex starting from the structure of its monomers are based on searching the structure corresponding to the global minimum of a suitable scoring function. However, protein complexes are often highly flexible, with mobile side chains and transient contacts due to thermal fluctuations. Flexibility can be neglected if one aims at finding quickly the approximate structure of the native complex, but may play a role in structure refinement, and in discriminating solutions characterized by similar scores. We here benchmark the capability of some state‐of‐the‐art scoring functions (BACH‐SixthSense, PIE/PISA and Rosetta) in discriminating finite‐temperature ensembles of structures corresponding to the native state and to non‐native configurations. We produce the ensembles by running thousands of molecular dynamics simulations in explicit solvent starting from poses generated by rigid docking and optimized in vacuum. We find that while Rosetta outperformed the other two scoring functions in scoring the structures in vacuum, BACH‐SixthSense and PIE/PISA perform better in distinguishing near‐native ensembles of structures generated by molecular dynamics in explicit solvent. Proteins 2016; 84:1312–1320. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A combinatorial scoring function for protein–RNA docking

Protein–RNA docking is still an open question. One of the main challenges is to develop an effective scoring function that can discriminate near‐native structures from the incorrect ones. To solve the problem, we have constructed a knowledge‐based residue‐nucleotide pairwise potential with secondary structure information considered for nonribosomal protein–RNA docking. Here we developed a weighted combined scoring function RpveScore that consists of the pairwise potential and six physics‐based energy terms. The weights were optimized using the multiple linear regression method by fitting the scoring function to L_rmsd for the bound docking decoys from Benchmark II. The scoring functions were tested on 35 unbound docking cases. The results show that the scoring function RpveScore including all terms performs best. Also RpveScore was compared with the statistical mechanics‐based method derived potential ITScore‐PR, and the united atom‐based statistical potentials QUASI‐RNP and DARS‐RNP. The success rate of RpveScore is 71.6% for the top 1000 structures and the number of cases where a near‐native structure is ranked in top 30 is 25 out of 35 cases. For 32 systems (91.4%), RpveScore can find the binding mode in top 5 that has no lower than 50% native interface residues on protein and nucleotides on RNA. Additionally, it was found that the long‐range electrostatic attractive energy plays an important role in distinguishing near‐native structures from the incorrect ones. This work can be helpful for the development of protein–RNA docking methods and for the understanding of protein–RNA interactions. RpveScore program is available to the public at http://life.bjut.edu.cn/kxyj/kycg/2017116/14845362285362368_1.html Proteins 2017; 85:741–752. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Probing the role of interfacial waters in protein–DNA recognition using a hybrid implicit/explicit solvation model

When proteins bind to their DNA target sites, ordered water molecules are often present at the protein–DNA interface bridging protein and DNA through hydrogen bonds. What is the role of these ordered interfacial waters? Are they important determinants of the specificity of DNA sequence recognition, or do they act in binding in a primarily nonspecific manner, by improving packing of the interface, shielding unfavorable electrostatic interactions, and solvating unsatisfied polar groups that are inaccessible to bulk solvent? When modeling details of structure and binding preferences, can fully implicit solvent models be fruitfully applied to protein–DNA interfaces, or must the individualistic properties of these interfacial waters be accounted for? To address these questions, we have developed a hybrid implicit/explicit solvation model that specifically accounts for the locations and orientations of small numbers of DNA‐bound water molecules, while treating the majority of the solvent implicitly. Comparing the performance of this model with that of its fully implicit counterpart, we find that explicit treatment of interfacial waters results in a modest but significant improvement in protein side‐chain placement and DNA sequence recovery. Base‐by‐base comparison of the performance of the two models highlights DNA sequence positions whose recognition may be dependent on interfacial water. Our study offers large‐scale statistical evidence for the role of ordered water for protein–DNA recognition, together with detailed examination of several well‐characterized systems. In addition, our approach provides a template for modeling explicit water molecules at interfaces that should be extensible to other systems. Proteins 2013; 81:1318–1329. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

iATTRACT: Simultaneous global and local interface optimization for protein–protein docking refinement

Protein‐protein interactions are abundant in the cell but to date structural data for a large number of complexes is lacking. Computational docking methods can complement experiments by providing structural models of complexes based on structures of the individual partners. A major caveat for docking success is accounting for protein flexibility. Especially, interface residues undergo significant conformational changes upon binding. This limits the performance of docking methods that keep partner structures rigid or allow limited flexibility. A new docking refinement approach, iATTRACT, has been developed which combines simultaneous full interface flexibility and rigid body optimizations during docking energy minimization. It employs an atomistic molecular mechanics force field for intermolecular interface interactions and a structure‐based force field for intramolecular contributions. The approach was systematically evaluated on a large protein‐protein docking benchmark, starting from an enriched decoy set of rigidly docked protein–protein complexes deviating by up to 15 Å from the native structure at the interface. Large improvements in sampling and slight but significant improvements in scoring/discrimination of near native docking solutions were observed. Complexes with initial deviations at the interface of up to 5.5 Å were refined to significantly better agreement with the native structure. Improvements in the fraction of native contacts were especially favorable, yielding increases of up to 70%. Proteins 2015; 83:248–258. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Incorporating replacement free energy of binding‐site waters in molecular docking

Binding‐site water molecules play a crucial role in protein‐ligand recognition, either being displaced upon ligand binding or forming water bridges to stabilize the complex. However, rigorously treating explicit binding‐site waters is challenging in molecular docking, which requires to fully sample ensembles of waters and to consider the free energy cost of replacing waters. Here, we describe a method to incorporate structural and energetic properties of binding‐site waters into molecular docking. We first developed a solvent property analysis (SPA) program to compute the replacement free energies of binding‐site water molecules by post‐processing molecular dynamics trajectories obtained from ligand‐free protein structure simulation in explicit water. Next, we implemented a distance‐dependent scoring term into DOCK scoring function to take account of the water replacement free energy cost upon ligand binding. We assessed this approach in protein targets containing important binding‐site waters, and we demonstrated that our approach is reliable in reproducing the crystal binding geometries of protein‐ligand‐water complexes, as well as moderately improving the ligand docking enrichment performance. In addition, SPA program (free available to academic users upon request) may be applied in identifying hot‐spot binding‐site residues and structure‐based lead optimization. Proteins 2014; 82:1765–1776. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Scoring protein interaction decoys using exposed residues (SPIDER): a novel multibody interaction scoring function based on frequent geometric patterns of interfacial residues

Accurate prediction of the structure of protein-protein complexes in computational docking experiments remains a formidable challenge. It has been recognized that identifying native or native-like poses among multiple decoys is the major bottleneck of the current scoring functions used in docking. We have developed a novel multibody pose-scoring function that has no theoretical limit on the number of residues contributing to the individual interaction terms. We use a coarse-grain representation of a protein-protein complex where each residue is represented by its side chain centroid. We apply a computational geometry approach called Almost-Delaunay tessellation that transforms protein-protein complexes into a residue contact network, or an undirectional graph where vertex-residues are nodes connected by edges. This treatment forms a family of interfacial graphs representing a dataset of protein-protein complexes. We then employ frequent subgraph mining approach to identify common interfacial residue patterns that appear in at least a subset of native protein-protein interfaces. The geometrical parameters and frequency of occurrence of each "native" pattern in the training set are used to develop the new SPIDER scoring function. SPIDER was validated using standard "ZDOCK" benchmark dataset that was not used in the development of SPIDER. We demonstrate that SPIDER scoring function ranks native and native-like poses above geometrical decoys and that it exceeds in performance a popular ZRANK scoring function. SPIDER was ranked among the top scoring functions in a recent round of CAPRI (Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions) blind test of protein-protein docking methods.     

Prediction of the binding energy for small molecules,peptides and proteins

A fast and reliable evaluation of the binding energy from a single conformation of a molecular complex is an important practical task. Knowledge‐based scoring schemes may not be sufficiently general and transferable, while molecular dynamics or Monte Carlo calculations with explicit solvent are too computationally expensive for many applications. Recently, several empirical schemes using finite difference Poisson–Boltzmann electrostatics to predict energies for particular types of complexes were proposed. Here, an improved empirical binding energy function has been derived and validated on three different types of complexes: protein–small ligand, protein–peptide and protein–protein. The function uses the boundary element algorithm to evaluate the electrostatic solvation energy. We show that a single set of parameters can predict the relative binding energies of the heterogeneous validation set of complexes with 2.5 kcal/mol accuracy. We also demonstrate that global optimization of the ligand and of the flexible side‐chains of the receptor improves the accuracy of the evaluation. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Benchmarking a computational design method for the incorporation of metal ion‐binding sites at symmetric protein interfaces

The design of novel metal‐ion binding sites along symmetric axes in protein oligomers could provide new avenues for metalloenzyme design, construction of protein‐based nanomaterials and novel ion transport systems. Here, we describe a computational design method, symmetric protein recursive ion‐cofactor sampling (SyPRIS), for locating constellations of backbone positions within oligomeric protein structures that are capable of supporting desired symmetrically coordinated metal ion(s) chelated by sidechains (chelant model). Using SyPRIS on a curated benchmark set of protein structures with symmetric metal binding sites, we found high recovery of native metal coordinating rotamers: in 65 of the 67 (97.0%) cases, native rotamers featured in the best scoring model while in the remaining cases native rotamers were found within the top three scoring models. In a second test, chelant models were crossmatched against protein structures with identical cyclic symmetry. In addition to recovering all native placements, 10.4% (8939/86013) of the non‐native placements, had acceptable geometric compatibility scores. Discrimination between native and non‐native metal site placements was further enhanced upon constrained energy minimization using the Rosetta energy function. Upon sequence design of the surrounding first‐shell residues, we found further stabilization of native placements and a small but significant (1.7%) number of non‐native placement‐based sites with favorable Rosetta energies, indicating their designability in existing protein interfaces. The generality of the SyPRIS approach allows design of novel symmetric metal sites including with non‐natural amino acid sidechains, and should enable the predictive incorporation of a variety of metal‐containing cofactors at symmetric protein interfaces.     

An iterative knowledge-based scoring function for protein-protein recognition

Using an efficient iterative method, we have developed a distance-dependent knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-protein interactions. The function, referred to as ITScore-PP, was derived using the crystal structures of a training set of 851 protein-protein dimeric complexes containing true biological interfaces. The key idea of the iterative method for deriving ITScore-PP is to improve the interatomic pair potentials by iteration, until the pair potentials can distinguish true binding modes from decoy modes for the protein-protein complexes in the training set. The iterative method circumvents the challenging reference state problem in deriving knowledge-based potentials. The derived scoring function was used to evaluate the ligand orientations generated by ZDOCK 2.1 and the native ligand structures on a diverse set of 91 protein-protein complexes. For the bound test cases, ITScore-PP yielded a success rate of 98.9% if the top 10 ranked orientations were considered. For the more realistic unbound test cases, the corresponding success rate was 40.7%. Furthermore, for faster orientational sampling purpose, several residue-level knowledge-based scoring functions were also derived following the similar iterative procedure. Among them, the scoring function that uses the side-chain center of mass (SCM) to represent a residue, referred to as ITScore-PP(SCM), showed the best performance and yielded success rates of 71.4% and 30.8% for the bound and unbound cases, respectively, when the top 10 orientations were considered. ITScore-PP was further tested using two other published protein-protein docking decoy sets, the ZDOCK decoy set and the RosettaDock decoy set. In addition to binding mode prediction, the binding scores predicted by ITScore-PP also correlated well with the experimentally determined binding affinities, yielding a correlation coefficient of R = 0.71 on a test set of 74 protein-protein complexes with known affinities. ITScore-PP is computationally efficient. The average run time for ITScore-PP was about 0.03 second per orientation (including optimization) on a personal computer with 3.2 GHz Pentium IV CPU and 3.0 GB RAM. The computational speed of ITScore-PP(SCM) is about an order of magnitude faster than that of ITScore-PP. ITScore-PP and/or ITScore-PP(SCM) can be combined with efficient protein docking software to study protein-protein recognition.     

Computational protocol for predicting the binding affinities of zinc containing metalloprotein-ligand complexes

Zinc is one of the most important metal ions found in proteins performing specific functions associated with life processes. Coordination geometry of the zinc ion in the active site of the metalloprotein-ligand complexes poses a challenge in determining ligand binding affinities accurately in structure-based drug design. We report here an all atom force field based computational protocol for estimating rapidly the binding affinities of zinc containing metalloprotein-ligand complexes, considering electrostatics, van der Waals, hydrophobicity, and loss in conformational entropy of protein side chains upon ligand binding along with a nonbonded approach to model the interactions of the zinc ion with all the other atoms of the complex. We examined the sensitivity of the binding affinity predictions to the choice of Lennard-Jones parameters, partial atomic charges, and dielectric treatments adopted for system preparation and scoring. The highest correlation obtained was R2 = 0.77 (r = 0.88) for the predicted binding affinity against the experiment on a heterogenous dataset of 90 zinc containing metalloprotein-ligand complexes consisting of five unique protein targets. Model validation and parameter analysis studies underscore the robustness and predictive ability of the scoring function. The high correlation obtained suggests the potential applicability of the methodology in designing novel ligands for zinc-metalloproteins. The scoring function has been web enabled for free access at www.scfbio-iitd.res.in/software/drugdesign/bapplz.jsp as BAPPL-Z server (Binding Affinity Prediction of Protein-Ligand complexes containing Zinc metal ions).     

Protein-protein docking with multiple residue conformations and residue substitutions

The protein docking problem has two major aspects: sampling conformations and orientations, and scoring them for fit. To investigate the extent to which the protein docking problem may be attributed to the sampling of ligand side‐chain conformations, multiple conformations of multiple residues were calculated for the uncomplexed (unbound) structures of protein ligands. These ligand conformations were docked into both the complexed (bound) and unbound conformations of the cognate receptors, and their energies were evaluated using an atomistic potential function. The following questions were considered: (1) does the ensemble of precalculated ligand conformations contain a structure similar to the bound form of the ligand? (2) Can the large number of conformations that are calculated be efficiently docked into the receptors? (3) Can near‐native complexes be distinguished from non‐native complexes? Results from seven test systems suggest that the precalculated ensembles do include side‐chain conformations similar to those adopted in the experimental complexes. By assuming additivity among the side chains, the ensemble can be docked in less than 12 h on a desktop computer. These multiconformer dockings produce near‐native complexes and also non‐native complexes. When docked against the bound conformations of the receptors, the near‐native complexes of the unbound ligand were always distinguishable from the non‐native complexes. When docked against the unbound conformations of the receptors, the near‐native dockings could usually, but not always, be distinguished from the non‐native complexes. In every case, docking the unbound ligands with flexible side chains led to better energies and a better distinction between near‐native and non‐native fits. An extension of this algorithm allowed for docking multiple residue substitutions (mutants) in addition to multiple conformations. The rankings of the docked mutant proteins correlated with experimental binding affinities. These results suggest that sampling multiple residue conformations and residue substitutions of the unbound ligand contributes to, but does not fully provide, a solution to the protein docking problem. Conformational sampling allows a classical atomistic scoring function to be used; such a function may contribute to better selectivity between near‐native and non‐native complexes. Allowing for receptor flexibility may further extend these results.     

Local and global anatomy of antibody‐protein antigen recognition

Deciphering antibody‐protein antigen recognition is of fundamental and practical significance. We constructed an antibody structural dataset, partitioned it into human and murine subgroups, and compared it with nonantibody protein‐protein complexes. We investigated the physicochemical properties of regions on and away from the antibody‐antigen interfaces, including net charge, overall antibody charge distributions, and their potential role in antigen interaction. We observed that amino acid preference in antibody‐protein antigen recognition is entropy driven, with residues having low side‐chain entropy appearing to compensate for the high backbone entropy in interaction with protein antigens. Antibodies prefer charged and polar antigen residues and bridging water molecules. They also prefer positive net charge, presumably to promote interaction with negatively charged protein antigens, which are common in proteomes. Antibody‐antigen interfaces have large percentages of Tyr, Ser, and Asp, but little Lys. Electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions in the Ag binding sites might be coupled with Fab domains through organized charge and residue distributions away from the binding interfaces. Here we describe some features of antibody‐antigen interfaces and of Fab domains as compared with nonantibody protein‐protein interactions. The distributions of interface residues in human and murine antibodies do not differ significantly. Overall, our results provide not only a local but also a global anatomy of antibody structures.     

Restricted sidechain plasticity in the structures of native proteins and complexes

Protein-design methodology can now generate models of protein structures and interfaces with computed energies in the range of those of naturally occurring structures. Comparison of the properties of native structures and complexes to isoenergetic design models can provide insight into the properties of the former that reflect selection pressure for factors beyond the energy of the native state. We report here that sidechains in native structures and interfaces are significantly more constrained than designed interfaces and structures with equal computed binding energy or stability, which may reflect selection against potentially deleterious non-native interactions.     

The dataset for protein–RNA binding affinity

We have developed a non‐redundant protein–RNA binding benchmark dataset derived from the available protein–RNA structures in the Protein Database Bank. It consists of 73 complexes with measured binding affinity. The experimental conditions (pH and temperature) for binding affinity measurements are also listed in our dataset. This binding affinity dataset can be used to compare and develop protein–RNA scoring functions. The predicted binding free energy of the 73 complexes from three available scoring functions for protein–RNA docking has a low correlation with the binding Gibbs free energy calculated from K_d. © 2013 The Protein Society     

Scoring ligand similarity in structure‐based virtual screening

Scoring to identify high‐affinity compounds remains a challenge in virtual screening. On one hand, protein–ligand scoring focuses on weighting favorable and unfavorable interactions between the two molecules. Ligand‐based scoring, on the other hand, focuses on how well the shape and chemistry of each ligand candidate overlay on a three‐dimensional reference ligand. Our hypothesis is that a hybrid approach, using ligand‐based scoring to rank dockings selected by protein–ligand scoring, can ensure that high‐ranking molecules mimic the shape and chemistry of a known ligand while also complementing the binding site. Results from applying this approach to screen nearly 70 000 National Cancer Institute (NCI) compounds for thrombin inhibitors tend to support the hypothesis. EON ligand‐based ranking of docked molecules yielded the majority (4/5) of newly discovered, low to mid‐micromolar inhibitors from a panel of 27 assayed compounds, whereas ranking docked compounds by protein–ligand scoring alone resulted in one new inhibitor. Since the results depend on the choice of scoring function, an analysis of properties was performed on the top‐scoring docked compounds according to five different protein–ligand scoring functions, plus EON scoring using three different reference compounds. The results indicate that the choice of scoring function, even among scoring functions measuring the same types of interactions, can have an unexpectedly large effect on which compounds are chosen from screening. Furthermore, there was almost no overlap between the top‐scoring compounds from protein–ligand versus ligand‐based scoring, indicating the two approaches provide complementary information. Matchprint analysis, a new addition to the SLIDE (Screening Ligands by Induced‐fit Docking, Efficiently) screening toolset, facilitated comparison of docked molecules' interactions with those of known inhibitors. The majority of interactions conserved among top‐scoring compounds for a given scoring function, and from the different scoring functions, proved to be conserved interactions in known inhibitors. This was particularly true in the S1 pocket, which was occupied by all the docked compounds. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A systematic analysis of scoring functions in rigid‐body protein docking: The delicate balance between the predictive rate improvement and the risk of overtraining

Protein‐protein interactions play fundamental roles in biological processes including signaling, metabolism, and trafficking. While the structure of a protein complex reveals crucial details about the interaction, it is often difficult to acquire this information experimentally. As the number of interactions discovered increases faster than they can be characterized, protein‐protein docking calculations may be able to reduce this disparity by providing models of the interacting proteins. Rigid‐body docking is a widely used docking approach, and is often capable of generating a pool of models within which a near‐native structure can be found. These models need to be scored in order to select the acceptable ones from the set of poses. Recently, more than 100 scoring functions from the CCharPPI server were evaluated for this task using decoy structures generated with SwarmDock. Here, we extend this analysis to identify the predictive success rates of the scoring functions on decoys from three rigid‐body docking programs, ZDOCK, FTDock, and SDOCK, allowing us to assess the transferability of the functions. We also apply set‐theoretic measure to test whether the scoring functions are capable of identifying near‐native poses within different subsets of the benchmark. This information can provide guides for the use of the most efficient scoring function for each docking method, as well as instruct future scoring functions development efforts. Proteins 2017; 85:1287–1297. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Computational Assessment of Protein–protein Binding Affinity by Reversely Engineering the Energetics in Protein Complexes

The cellular functions of proteins are maintained by forming diverse complexes. The stability of these complexes is quantified by the measurement of binding affinity, and mutations that alter the binding affinity can cause various diseases such as cancer and diabetes. As a result, accurate estimation of the binding stability and the effects of mutations on changes of binding affinity is a crucial step to understanding the biological functions of proteins and their dysfunctional consequences. It has been hypothesized that the stability of a protein complex is dependent not only on the residues at its binding interface by pairwise interactions but also on all other remaining residues that do not appear at the binding interface. Here, we computationally reconstruct the binding affinity by decomposing it into the contributions of interfacial residues and other non-interfacial residues in a protein complex. We further assume that the contributions of both interfacial and non-interfacial residues to the binding affinity depend on their local structural environments such as solvent-accessible surfaces and secondary structural types. The weights of all corresponding parameters are optimized by Monte-Carlo simulations. After cross-validation against a large-scale dataset, we show that the model not only shows a strong correlation between the absolute values of the experimental and calculated binding affinities, but can also be an effective approach to predict the relative changes of binding affinity from mutations. Moreover, we have found that the optimized weights of many parameters can capture the first-principle chemical and physical features of molecular recognition, therefore reversely engineering the energetics of protein complexes. These results suggest that our method can serve as a useful addition to current computational approaches for predicting binding affinity and understanding the molecular mechanism of protein–protein interactions.