Beyond Membrane Protein Structure: Drug Discovery, Dynamics and Difficulties

  • Philip C. BigginEmail author
  • Matteo Aldeghi
  • Michael J. Bodkin
  • Alexander Heifetz
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 922)


Most of the previous content of this book has focused on obtaining the structures of membrane proteins. In this chapter we explore how those structures can be further used in two key ways. The first is their use in structure based drug design (SBDD) and the second is how they can be used to extend our understanding of their functional activity via the use of molecular dynamics. Both aspects now heavily rely on computations. This area is vast, and alas, too large to consider in depth in a single book chapter. Thus where appropriate we have referred the reader to recent reviews for deeper assessment of the field. We discuss progress via the use of examples from two main drug target areas; G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) and ion channels. We end with a discussion of some of the main challenges in the area.


Structure based drug design Molecular dynamics Simulation Ion channels Glutamate receptor G-protein coupled receptor Docking Virtual screening  



MA is supported by the EPSRC and Evotec via the Systems Approaches to Biomedical Sciences Doctoral Training Centre. Philip C. Biggin acknowledges support from the BBSRC and MRC.


  1. Abel R, Young T, Farid R, Berne BJ, Friesner RA (2008) Role of the active-site solvent in the thermodynamics of factor Xa ligand binding. J Am Chem Soc 130:2817–2831PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldeghi M, Heifetz A, Bodkin MJ, Knapp S, Biggin PC (2016) Accurate calculation of the absolute free energy of binding for drug molecules. Chem Sci 7:207–218PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alvarez-Garcia D, Barril X (2014) Molecular simulations with solvent competition quantify water displaceability and provide accurate interaction maps of protein binding sites. J Med Chem 57:8530–8539PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amaro R, Baron R, McCammon JA (2008) An improved relaxed complex scheme for receptor flexibility in computer-aided drug design. J Comput-Aided Mol Des 22:693–705PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Armstrong N, Gouaux E (2000) Mechanisms for activation and antagonism of an AMPA-sensitive glutamate receptor: Crystal structures of the GluR2 ligand binding core. Neuron 28:165–181PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Assaf Z, Larsen AP, Venskutonytė R, Han L, Abrahamsen B et al (2013) Chemoenzymatic synthesis of new 2,4-syn-functionalized (S)-glutamate analogues and structure–activity relationship studies at ionotropic glutamate receptors and excitatory amino acid transporters. J Med Chem 56:1614–1628PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ayton GS, Lyman E, Voth GA (2010) Hierarchical coarse-graining strategy for protein-membrane systems to access mesoscopic scales. Faraday Discuss 144:347–481PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barducci A, Bonomi M, Parrinello M (2011) Metadynamics. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comp Mol Sci 1:826–843 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beddell CR, Goodford PJ, Norrington FE, Wilkinson S, Wootton R (1976) Compounds designed to fit a site of known structure in human haemoglobin. Br J Pharmacol 57:201–209PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bermudez M, Wolber G (2015) Structure versus function—the impact of computational methods on the discovery of specific GPCR–ligands. Bioorg Med Chem 23:3907–3912PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biggin PC, Bond PJ (2015) Molecular dynamics simulations of membrane proteins. Methods Mol Biol 1215:91–108PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bollini M, Domaoal RA, Thakur VV, Gallardo-Macias R, Spasov KA et al (2011) Computationally-guided optimization of a docking hit to yield catechol diethers as potent anti-HIV agents. J Med Chem 54:8582–8591PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bortolato A, Tehan BG, Bodnarchuk MS, Essex JW, Mason JS (2013) Water network perturbation in ligand binding: Adenosine A2A antagonists as a case study. J Chem Inf Model 53:1700–1713PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boyce SE, Mobley DL, Rocklin GJ, Graves AP, Dill KA et al (2009) Predicting ligand binding affinity with alchemical free energy methods in a polar model binding site. J Mol Biol 394:747–763PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Buch I, Giorgino T, De Fabritiis G (2011) Complete reconstruction of an enzyme-inhibitor binding process by molecular dynamics simulations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:10184–10189PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bunch L, Krogsgaard-Larsen P (2009) Subtype selective kainic acid receptor agonists: discovery and approaches to rational design. Med Res Rev 29:3–28PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burg JS, Ingram JR, Venkatakrishnan AJ, Jude KM, Dukkipati A et al (2015) Structural basis for chemokine recognition and activation of a viral G protein–coupled receptor. Science 347:1113–1117PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Caldwell N, Harms JE, Partin KM, Jamieson C (2015) Rational design of a novel AMPA receptor modulator through a hybridization approach. ACS Med Chem Lett 6:392–396PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cavalli A, Spitaleri A, Saladino G, Gervasio FL (2015) Investigating drug–target association and dissociation mechanisms using metadynamics-based algorithms. Acc Chem Res 48:277–285PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cerqueira NM, Gesto D, Oliveira EF, Santos-Martins D, Brás NF et al (2015) Receptor-based virtual screening protocol for drug discovery. Arch Biochem Biophys, epub onlinePubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chen JM, Xu SL, Wawrzak Z, Basarab GS, Jordan DB (1998) Structure-based design of potent inhibitors of scytalone dehydratase: displacement of a water molecule from the active site. Biochemistry 37:17735–17744PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chen H, Wang CZ, Ding C, Wild C, Copits B et al (2013) A combined bioinformatics and chemoinformatics approach for developing asymmetric bivalent ampa receptor positive allosteric modulators as neuroprotective agents. ChemMedChem 8:226–230PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cheng T, Li Q, Zhou Z, Wang Y, Bryant SH (2012) Structure-based virtual screening for drug discovery: a problem-centric review. AAPS J 14:133–141 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chipot C (2014) Frontiers in free-energy calculations of biological systems. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Mol Sci 4:71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chodera JD, Mobley DL, Shirts MR, Dixon RW, Branson K et al (2011) Alchemical free energy methods for drug discovery: progress and challenges. Curr Opin Struct Biol 21:150–160PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Clarke C, Woods RJ, Gluska J, Cooper A, Nutley MA et al (2001) Involvement of water in carbohydrate-protein binding. J Am Chem Soc 123:12238–12247PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cohen SS (1977) A strategy for the chemotherapy of infectious disease. Science 197:431–432PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cross JB, Thompson DC, Rai BK, Baber JC, Fan KY et al (2009) Comparison of several molecular docking programs: pose prediction and virtual screening accuracy. J Chem Inf Model 49:1455–1474PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Cusack KP, Wang Y, Hoemann MZ, Marjanovic J, Heym RG et al (2015) Design strategies to address kinetics of drug binding and residence time. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 25:2019–2027PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Demmer CS, Møller C, Brown PMGE, Han L, Pickering DS et al (2015) Binding mode of an α-amino acid-linked quinoxaline-2,3-dione analogue at glutamate receptor subtype GluK1. ACS Chem Neurosci 6:845–854PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Doerr S, De Fabritiis G (2014) On-the-fly learning and sampling of ligand binding by high-throughput molecular simulations. J Chem Theor Comput 10:2064–2069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dror RO, Pan AC, Arlow DH, Borhani DW, Maragakis P et al (2011) Pathway and mechanism of drug binding to G-protein-coupled receptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:13118–13123PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dror RO, Mildorf TJ, Hilger D, Manglik A, Borhani DW et al (2015) Structural basis for nucleotide exchange in heterotrimeric G proteins. Science 348:1361–1365PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Durrant JD, McCammon JA (2011) Molecular dynamics simulations and drug discovery. BMC Biol 9:71–71PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Elokely KM, Doerksen RJ (2013) Docking challenge: protein sampling and molecular docking performance. J Chem Inf Model 53:1934–1945PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fedorov DG, Kitaura K (2007) Extending the power of quantum chemistry to large systems with the fragment molecular orbital method. J Phys Chem A 111:6904–6914PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Forli S, Olson A (2015) Computational challenges of structure-based approaches applied to HIV. In: Torbett BE, Goodsell DS, Richman DD (eds) The future of HIV-1 therapeutics.: Springer International Publishing, pp 31–51Google Scholar
  38. Frembgen-Kesner T, Elcock AH (2006) Computational sampling of a cryptic drug binding site in a protein receptor: explicit solvent molecular dynamics and inhibitor docking to p38 MAP kinase. J Mol Biol 359:202–214PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Frydenvang K, Pickering DS, Greenwood JR, Krogsgaard-Larsen N, Brehm L et al (2010) Biostructural and pharmacological studies of bicyclic analogues of the 3-isoxazolol glutamate receptor agonist ibotenic acid. J Med Chem 53:8354–8361PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fujitani H, Tanida Y, Ito M, Jayachandran G, Snow CD et al (2005) Direct calculation of the binding free energies of FKBP ligands. J Chem Phys 123(8):084108PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gilson MK, Zhou H-X (2007) Calculation of protein-ligand binding affinities. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 36:21–42PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gohlke H, Klebe G (2002) Approaches to the description and prediction of the binding affinity of small-molecule ligands to macromolecular receptors. Angew Chem Int Ed 41:2644–2676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Goose JE, Sansom MSP (2013) Reduced lateral mobility of lipids and proteins in crowded membranes. PLoS Comp Biol 9, e1003033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Grouleff J, Irudayam SJ, Skeby KK, Schiøtt B (2015) The influence of cholesterol on membrane protein structure, function, and dynamics studied by molecular dynamics simulations. Biochim Biophys Acta 1848:1783–1795PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Guo D, Mulder-Krieger T, Ijzerman AP, Heitman LH (2012) Functional efficacy of adenosine A2A receptor agonists is positively correlated to their receptor residence time. Br J Pharm 166:1846–1859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Guo D, Hillger JM, Ijzerman AP, Heitman LH (2014) Drug-target residence time—a case for G protein-coupled receptors. Med Res Rev 34:856–892PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Han M, Lou J, Nakanishi K, Sakmar TP, Smith SO (1997) Partial agonist activity of 11-cis-retinal in rhodopsin mutants. J Biol Chem 272:23081–23085PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Harms JE, Benveniste M, MacLean JKF, Partin KM, Jamieson C (2013) Functional analysis of a novel positive allosteric modulator of AMPA receptors derived from a structure-based drug design strategy. Neuropharmacology 64:45–52PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Harvey MJ, De Fabritiis G (2015) AceCloud: molecular dynamics simulations in the cloud. J Chem Inf Model 55:909–914PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Heifetz A, Morris GB, Biggin PC, Barker O, Fryatt T et al (2012) Study of human Orexin-1 and −2 -G-protein-coupled receptors with novel and published antagonists by modeling, molecular dynamics simulations, and site-directed mutagenesis. Biochemistry 51:3178–3197PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Heifetz A, Barker O, Morris GB, Law RJ, Slack M et al (2013a) Toward an understanding of agonist binding to human Orexin-1 and Orexin-2 receptors with G-protein-coupled receptor modeling and site directed mutagenesis. Biochemistry 52:8246–8260PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Heifetz A, Barker O, Verquin G, Wimmer N, Meutermans W, Pal S, Law RJ, Whittaker M (2013b) Fighting obesity with a sugar-based library: discovery of novel MCH-1R antagonists by a new computational-VAST approach for exploration of GPCR binding sites. J Chem Inf Model 53:1084–1099 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Heifetz A, Mazanetz M, James T, Pal S, Law RJ et al (2013c) From receptors to ligands: fragment-assisted drug design for GPCRs applied to the discovery of H3 and H4 receptor antagonists. Med Chem 4:313–321Google Scholar
  54. Heifetz A, Schertler GX, Seifert R, Tate C, Sexton P et al (2015) GPCR structure, function, drug discovery and crystallography: report from Academia-Industry International Conference (UK Royal Society) Chicheley Hall, 1–2 September 2014. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Arch Pharmacol 388:883–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Henchman RH, McCammon JA (2002) Extracting hydration sites around proteins from explicit water simulations. J Comput Chem 23:861–869PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Higgs C, Beuming T, Sherman W (2010) Hydration site thermodynamics explain SARs for Triazolylpurines analogues binding to the A2A receptor. ACS Med Chem Lett 1:160–164PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Hoffmann C, Castro M, Rinken A, Leurs R, Hill SJ et al (2015) Ligand residence time at GPCRs – why we should take our time to study it. Mol Pharm 88:552–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Holst B, Nygaard R, Valentin-Hansen L, Bach A, Engelstoft MS et al (2010) A conserved aromatic lock for the tryptophan rotameric switch in TM-VI of seven-transmembrane receptors. J Biol Chem 285:3973–3985PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Imai T, Hiraoka R, Kovalenko A, Hirata F (2007) Locating missing water molecules in protein cavities by the three-dimensional reference interaction site model theory of molecular solvation. Proteins Struct Func Genet 66:804–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Imai T, Oda K, Kovalenko A, Hirata F, Kidera A (2009) Ligand mapping on protein surfaces by the 3D-RISM theory: toward computational fragment-based drug design. J Am Chem Soc 131:12430–12440PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Isberg V, Vroling B, van der Kant R, Li K, Vriend G et al (2014) GPCRDB: an information system for G protein-coupled receptors. Nucleic Acids Res 42:D422–D425PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ivetac A, McCammon JA (2010) Mapping the druggable allosteric space of g-protein coupled receptors: a fragment-based molecular dynamics approach. Chem Biol Drug Des 76:201–217PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. Jamieson C, Maclean JKF, Brown CI, Campbell RA, Gillen KJ et al (2011) Structure based evolution of a novel series of positive modulators of the AMPA receptor. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 21:805–811PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Jazayeri A, Dias JM, Marshall FH (2015) From G protein-coupled receptor structure resolution to rational drug design. J Biol Chem 290:19489–19495PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Jensen M, Jogini V, Borhani DW, Leffler AE, Dror RO et al (2012) Mechanism of voltage gating in potassium channels. Science 336:229–233PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Jorgensen WL (2009) Efficient drug lead discovery and optimization. Acc Chem Res 42:724–733PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Jorgensen WL, Bollini M, Thakur VV, Domaoal RA, Spasov KA et al (2011) Efficient discovery of potent anti-HIV agents targeting the Tyr181Cys variant of HIV reverse transcriptase. J Am Chem Soc 133:15686–15696PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Juknaitė L, Venskutonytė R, Assaf Z, Faure S, Gefflaut T et al (2012) Pharmacological and structural characterization of conformationally restricted (S)-glutamate analogues at ionotropic glutamate receptors. J Struct Biol 180:39–46PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kalli AC, Campbell ID, Sansom MSP (2013) Conformational changes in talin on binding to anionic phospholipid membranes facilitate signaling by integrin transmembrane helices. PLoS Comp Biol 9, e1003316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Keserü GM, Swinney DC (eds) (2015) Thermodynamics and kinetics of drug binding. Wiley-VCH, Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  71. Khatri A, Burger PB, Swanger SA, Hansen KB, Zimmerman S et al (2014) Structural determinants and mechanism of action of a GluN2C-selective NMDA receptor positive allosteric modulator. Mol Pharm 86:548–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Klebe G (2015) The use of thermodynamic and kinetic data in drug discovery: decisive insight or increasing the puzzlement? ChemMedChem 10:229–231PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Lam PY, Jadhav PK, Eyermann CJ, Hodge CN, Ru Y et al (1994) Rational design of potent, bioavailable, nonpeptide cyclic ureas as HIV protease inhibitors. Science 263:380–384PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Lape R, Colquhoun D, Sivilotti LG (2008) On the nature of partial agonism in the nicotinic receptor superfamily. Nature 454:722–727PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Lazaridis T (1998a) Inhomogeneous fluid approach to solvation thermodynamics. 1. Theory. J Phys Chem B 102:3531–3541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Lazaridis T (1998b) Inhomogeneous fluid approach to solvation thermodynamics. 2. Applications to simple fluids. J Phys Chem B 102:3542–3550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Lee J, Daniels V, Sands ZA, Lebon F, Shi J et al (2015) Exploring the interaction of SV2A with racetams using homology modelling, molecular dynamics and site-directed mutagenesis. PLoS ONE 10, e0116589PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Levoin N, Calmels T, Krief S, Danvy D, Berrebi-Bertrand I et al (2011) Homology model versus x-ray structure in receptor-based drug design: a retrospective analysis with the dopamine D3 receptor. ACS Med Chem Lett 2:293–297PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Li Z, Lazaridis T (2003) Thermodynamic contributions of the ordered water molecule in HIV-1 protease. J Am Chem Soc 125:6636–6637PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Li Z, Lazaridis T (2005a) The effect of water displacement on binding thermodynamics: concanavalin A. J Phys Chem B 109:662–670PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Li Z, Lazaridis T (2005b) Thermodynamics of buried water clusters at a protein at ligand binding interface. J Phys Chem B 110:1464–1475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Limongelli V, Bonomi M, Parrinello M (2013) Funnel metadynamics as accurate binding free-energy method. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:6358–6363PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Lin Y-L, Roux B (2013) Computational analysis of the binding specificity of Gleevec to Abl, c-Kit, Lck, and c-Src tyrosine kinases. J Am Chem Soc 135:14741–14753PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Lin JH, Perryman AL, Schames JR, McCammon JA (2002) Computational drug-design accomodating receptor flexibility: the relaxed complex scheme. J Am Chem Soc 124:5632–5633PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lin Y-L, Meng Y, Jiang W, Roux B (2013) Explaining why Gleevec is a specific and potent inhibitor of Abl kinase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:1664–1669PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Lionta E, Spyrou G, Vassilatis DK, Cournia Z (2014) Structure-based virtual screening for drug discovery: principles, applications and recent advances. Curr Top Med Chem 14:1923–1938PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lounnas V, Ritschel T, Kelder J, McGuire R, Bywater RP et al (2013) Current progress in structure-based rational drug design marks a new mindset in drug discovery. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 5, e201302011PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Lu Y, Wang R, Yang C-Y, Wang S (2007) Analysis of ligand-bound water molecules in high resolution crystal structures of protein-ligand complexes. J Chem Inf Model 47:668–675PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Lukman S, Verma C, Fuentes G (2014) Exploiting protein intrinsic flexibility in drug design. In: Han K-l, Zhang X, Yang M-J (eds) Protein conformational dynamics. Springer International Publishing, pp 245–269Google Scholar
  90. Marshall G (2012) Limiting assumptions in structure-based design: binding entropy. J Comput-Aided Mol Des 26:3–8PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Mason JS, Bortolato A, Congreve M, Marshall FH (2012) New insights from structural biology into the druggability of G protein-coupled receptors. Trends Pharm Sci 33:249–260PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Miao Y, Nichols SE, McCammon JA (2014) Mapping of allosteric druggable sites in activation-associated conformers of the M2 muscarinic receptor. Chem Biol Drug Des 83:237–246PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Michel J, Essex JW (2010) Prediction of protein-ligand binding affinity by free energy simulations: assumptions, pitfalls and expectations. J Comput Aided Mol Des 24:639–658PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Michel J, Tirado-Rives J, Jorgensen WL (2009) Energetics of displacing water molecules from protein binding sites: consequences for ligand optimization. J Am Chem Soc 131:15403–15411PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Michel J, Foloppe N, Essex JW (2010) Rigorous free energy calculations in structure-based drug design. Mol Inf 29:570–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Micheletti C (2013) Comparing proteins by their internal dynamics: exploring structure-function relationships beyond static structural alignments. Phys Life Rev 10:1–26PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Miller DC, Lunn G, Jones P, Sabnis Y, Davies NL et al (2012) Investigation of the effect of molecular properties on the binding kinetics of a ligand to its biological target. Med Chem Commun 3:449–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Mobley DL (2014) Blind prediction of HIV integrase binding from the SAMPL4 challenge. J Comput-Aided Mol Des 28:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Mobley DL, Dill KA (2009) Binding of small-molecule ligands to proteins: “What you see” is not always “What you get”. Structure 17:489–498PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Mobley DL, Klimovich PV (2012) Perspective: alchemical free energy calculations for drug discovery. J Chem Phys 137:230901PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Mobley DL, Chodera JD, Dill KA (2007a) Confine-and-release method: obtaining correct binding free energies in the presence of protein conformational change. J Chem Theory Comput 3:1231–1235PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Mobley DL, Graves AP, Chodera JD, McReynolds AC, Shoichet BK et al (2007b) Predicting absolute ligand binding free energies to a simple model site. J Mol Biol 371:1118–1134PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Mondal J, Friesner RA, Berne BJ (2014a) Role of desolvation in thermodynamics and kinetics of ligand binding to a kinase. J Chem Theory Comput 10:5696–5705PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Mondal S, Khelashvili G, Weinstein H (2014b) Not just an oil slick: how the energetics of protein-membrane interactions impacts the function and organization of transmembrane proteins. Biophys J 106:2305– 2316PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Moroni E, Paladino A, Colombo G (2015) The dynamics of drug discovery. Curr Top Med Chem 15:2043–2055PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Münz M, Lyngsø R, Hein J, Biggin PC (2010) Dynamics-based alignment of proteins: An alternative approach to quantify dynamic similarity. BMC Bioinf 11:118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Münz M, Hein J, Biggin PC (2012) The role of flexibility and conformational selection in the binding promiscuity of PDZ domains. PLoS Comput Biol 8, e1002749PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Murail S, Wallner B, Trudell James R, Bertaccini E, Lindahl E (2011) Microsecond simulations indicate that ethanol binds between subunits and could stabilize an open-state model of a glycine receptor. Biophys J 100:1642–1650PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Murail S, Howard RJ, Broemstrup T, Bertaccini EJ, Harris RA et al (2012) Molecular mechanism for the dual alcohol modulation of cys-loop receptors. PLoS Comput Biol 8, e1002710PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Newman AH, Beuming T, Banala AK, Donthamsetti P, Pongetti K et al (2012) Molecular determinants of selectivity and efficacy at the Dopamine D3 receptor. J Med Chem 55:6689–6699PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Nichols SE, Baron R, Ivetac A, McCammon JA (2011) Predictive power of molecular dynamics receptor structures in virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model 51:1439–1446PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Pande VS, Beauchamp K, Bowman GR (2010) Everything you wanted to know about Markov State Models but were afraid to ask. Methods 52:99–105PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Partin KM (2015) AMPA receptor potentiators: from drug design to cognitive enhancement. Curr Opin Pharmacol 20:46–53PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Pearlstein RA, Sherman W, Abel R (2013) Contributions of water transfer energy to protein-ligand association and dissociation barriers: Watermap analysis of a series of p38α MAP kinase inhibitors. Proteins Struct Func Bioinf 81:1509–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Pei J, Yin N, Ma X, Lai L (2014) Systems biology brings new dimensions for structure-based drug design. J Am Chem Soc 136:11556–11565PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Pirotte B, Francotte P, Goffin E, de Tullio P (2013) AMPA receptor positive allosteric modulators: a patent review. Expert Opin Ther Pat 23:615–628PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Pronk S, Larsson P, Pouya I, Bowman GR, Haque IS, et al (2011) Copernicus: a new paradigm for parallel adaptive molecular dynamics. In: Proceedings of 2011 international conference for high performance computing, networking, storage and analysis. ACM, Seattle, pp 1–10 Google Scholar
  118. Robinson DD, Sherman W, Farid R (2010) Understanding kinase selectivity through energetic analysis of binding site waters. ChemMedChem 5:618–627PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Ross GA, Morris GM, Biggin PC (2012) Rapid and accurate prediction and scoring of water molecules in protein binding sites. PLoS ONE 7, e32036PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Ross GA, Morris GM, Biggin PC (2013) One size does not fit all: the limits of structure-based models in drug discovery. J Chem Theory Comput 9:4266–4274PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Sahai MA, Biggin PC (2011) Quantifying water-mediated protein-ligand interactions in a glutamate receptor; A DFT study. J Phys Chem 115:7085–7096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Salari R, Murlidaran S, Brannigan G (2014) Pentameric ligand-gated ion channels: insights from computation. Mol Sim 40:821–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Schames JR, Henchman RH, Siegel JS, Sotriffer CA, Ni H et al (2004) Discovery of a novel binding trench in HIV integrase. J Med Chem 47:1879–1881PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Schmidt T, Bergner A, Schwede T (2014) Modelling three-dimensional protein structures for applications in drug design. Drug Discov Today 19:890–897PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Schneider EV, Böttcher J, Huber R, Maskos K, Neumann L (2013) Structure–kinetic relationship study of CDK8/CycC specific compounds. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:8081–8086PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Schwartz TW, Frimurer TM, Holst B, Rosenkilde MM, Elling CE (2006) Molecular mechanism of 7tm receptor activation—a global toggle switch model. Ann Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 46:481–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Seddon G, Lounnas V, McGuire R, van den Bergh T, Bywater RP et al (2012) Drug design for ever, from hype to hope. J Comp Aided Mol Des 26:137–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Sengupta D, Chattopadhyay A (2015) Molecular dynamics simulations of GPCR–cholesterol interaction: an emerging paradigm. Biochim Biophys Acta 1848:1775–1782PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Shirts MR, Mobley DL, Chodera JD (2007) Free energy calculations: ready for prime time? In: D. S, R. W (eds) Annu Rep Comput Chem, Elsevier, pp 41–59Google Scholar
  130. Shirts MR, Mobley DL, Brown SP (2010) Free-energy calculations in structure-based drug design. In: Merz KM, Ringe D, Reynolds CH (eds) Drug design. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 61–86Google Scholar
  131. Shoichet BK (2004) Virtual screening of chemical libraries. Nature 432:862–865PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Shukla D, Hernández CX, Weber JK, Pande VS (2015) Markov state models provide insights into dynamic modulation of protein function. Acc Chem Res 48:414–422PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Sivaprakasam M, Hansen KB, David O, Nielsen B, Traynelis SF et al (2009) Stereocontrolled synthesis and pharmacological evaluation of Azetidine-2,3-Dicarboxylic acids at NMDA receptors. ChemMedChem 4:110–117PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Skolnick J, Zhou H, Gao M (2013) Are predicted protein structures of any value for binding site prediction and virtual ligand screening? Curr Opin Struct Biol 23:191–197PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Spurny R, Debaveye S, Farinha A, Veys K, Vos AM et al (2015) Molecular blueprint of allosteric binding sites in a homologue of the agonist-binding domain of the α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:E2543–E2552PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Stansfeld Phillip J, Goose Joseph E, Caffrey M, Carpenter Elisabeth P, Parker Joanne L et al (2015) MemProtMD: automated insertion of membrane protein structures into explicit lipid membranes. Structure 23:1350–1361PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Strong KL, Jing Y, Prosser AR, Traynelis SF, Liotta DC (2014) NMDA receptor modulators: an updated patent review (2013–2014). Exp Opin Ther Pat 24:1349–1366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Swinney DC (2009) The role of binding kinetics in therapeutically useful drug action. Curr Opin Drug Discov Dev 12:31–39Google Scholar
  139. Tang H, Wang XS, Hsieh J-H, Tropsha A (2012) Do crystal structures obviate the need for theoretical models of GPCRs for structure based virtual screening. Proteins 80:1503–1521PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Tate CG (2012) A crystal clear solution for determining G-protein-coupled receptor structures. Trends Biochem Sci 37:343–352PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Tehan BG, Bortolato A, Blaney FE, Weir MP, Mason JS (2014) Unifying family A GPCR theories of activation. Pharm Res 143:51–60Google Scholar
  142. Timm DE, Benveniste M, Weeks AM, Nisenbaum ES, Partin KM (2011) Structural and functional analysis of two new positive allosteric modulators of GluA2 desensitization and deactivation. Mol Pharm 80:267–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Tiwary P, Limongelli V, Salvalaglio M, Parrinello M (2015) Kinetics of protein–ligand unbinding: predicting pathways, rates, and rate-limiting steps. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:E386–E391PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Tran Q-T, Williams S, Farid R, Erdemli G, Pearlstein R (2013) The translocation kinetics of antibiotics through porin OmpC: insights from structure-based solvation mapping using WaterMap. Proteins Struct Func Bioinf 81:291–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Trott O, Olson AJ (2010) AutoDock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. J Comput Chem 31:455–461PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  146. Tye H, Mueller SG, Prestle J, Scheuerer S, Schindler M et al (2011) Novel 6,7,8,9-tetrahydro-5H-1,4,7,10a-tetraaza-cyclohepta[f]indene analogues as potent and selective 5-HT2C agonists for the treatment of metabolic disorders. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 21:34–37PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Uteshev VV (2014) The therapeutic promise of positive allosteric modulation of nicotinic receptors. Eur J Pharm 727:181–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Venkatakrishnan AJ, Deupi X, Lebon G, Tate CG, Schertler GF et al (2013) Molecular signatures of G-protein-coupled receptors. Nature 494:185–194PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Venskutonytė R, Larsen AP, Frydenvang K, Gajhede M, Sagot E et al (2014) Molecular recognition of two 2,4-syn-functionalized (S)-glutamate analogues by the kainate receptor GluK3 ligand binding domain. ChemMedChem 9:2254–2259 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Vijayan R, Sahai MA, Czajkowski T, Biggin PC (2010) A comparative analysis of the role of water in the binding pockets of ionotropic glutamate receptors. Phys Chem Chem Phys 12:14057–14066PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Wang J, Deng Y, Roux B (2006) Absolute binding free energy calculations using molecular dynamics simulations with restraining potentials. Biophys J 91:2798–2814PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Wang L, Wu Y, Deng Y, Kim B, Pierce 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 137:2695–2703PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Ward SE, Harries M, Aldegheri L, Austin NE, Ballantine S et al (2010) Integration of lead optimization with crystallography for a membrane-bound ion channel target: discovery of a new class of AMPA receptor positive allosteric modulators. J Med Chem 54:78–94PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Ward SE, Pennicott LE, Beswick P (2015) AMPA receptor-positive allosteric modulators for the treatment of schizophrenia: an overview of recent patent applications. Future Med Chem 7:473–491PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Wassman CD, Baronio R, Demir Ö, Wallentine BD, Chen C-K et al (2013) Computational identification of a transiently open L1/S3 pocket for reactivation of mutant p53. Nat Commun 4:1407PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Weeks AM, Harms JE, Partin KM, Benveniste M (2014) Functional insight into development of positive allosteric modulators of AMPA receptors. Neuropharm 85:57–66 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Wissner A, Berger DM, Boschelli DH, Floyd MB Jr, Greenberger LM et al (2000) 4-Anilino-6,7-dialkoxyquinoline-3-carbonitrile inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor kinase and their bioisosteric relationship to the 4-anilino-6,7-dialkoxyquinazoline inhibitors. J Med Chem 43:3244–3256PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Wlodawer A, Minor W, Dauter Z, Jaskolski M (2008) Protein crystallography for non-crystallographers, or how to get the best (but not more) from published macromolecular structures. FEBS 275:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Wlodawer A, Minor W, Dauter Z, Jaskolski M (2013) Protein crystallography for aspiring crystallographers or how to avoid pitfalls and traps in macromolecular structure determination. FEBS 280:5705–5736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Young JW, Geyer MA (2013) Evaluating the role of the alpha-7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor in the pathophysiology and treatment of schizophrenia. Biochem Pharm 86:1122–1132PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Young RJ, Campbell M, Borthwick AD, Brown D, Burns-Kurtis CL et al (2006) Structure- and property-based design of factor Xa inhibitors: pyrrolidin-2-ones with acyclic alanyl amides as P4 motifs. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 16:5953–5957PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Yu R, Hurdiss E, Greiner T, Lape R, Sivilotti L et al (2014) Agonist and antagonist binding in human glycine receptors. Biochemistry 53:6041–6051PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Yu Z, van Veldhoven JPD, Louvel J, ’t Hart IME, Rook MB et al (2015) Structure–affinity relationships (SARs) and structure–kinetics relationships (SKRs) of Kv11.1 blockers. J Med Chem 58:5916–5929PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip C. Biggin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Matteo Aldeghi
    • 1
  • Michael J. Bodkin
    • 2
  • Alexander Heifetz
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiochemistryUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Evotec LtdAbingdonUK

Personalised recommendations