Chemogenomics pp 249-279 | Cite as

The Flexible Pocketome Engine for Structural Chemogenomics

  • Ruben Abagyan
  • Irina Kufareva
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 575)

Summary

Biological metabolites, substrates, cofactors, chemical probes, and drugs bind to flexible pockets in multiple biological macromolecules to exert their biological effect. The rapid growth of the structural databases and sequence data, including SNPs and disease-related genome modifications, complemented by the new cutting-edge 3D docking, scoring, and profiling methods has created a unique opportunity to develop a comprehensive structural map of interactions between any small molecule and biopolymers. Here we demonstrate that a comprehensive structural genomics engine can be built using multiple pocket conformations, experimentally determined or generated with a variety of modeling methods, and new efficient ensemble docking algorithms. In contrast to traditional ligand-activity-based engines trained on known chemical structures and their activities, the structural pocketome and docking engine will allow prediction of poses and activities for new, previously unknown, protein binding sites, and new, previously uncharacterized, chemical scaffolds. This de novo structure-based activity prediction engine may dramatically accelerate the discovery of potent and specific therapeutics with reduced side effects.

Key words

Pocketome Chemical biology Flexible docking Ensemble docking Drug screening Activity prediction SCARE algorithm Binding site Virtual ligand screening 

References

  1. 1.
    Hendlich, M., Bergner, A., Gunther, J., and Klebe, G. (2003) Relibase: design and development of a database for comprehensive analysis of protein-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol. 326, 607–620.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kuhn, D., Weskamp, N., Hullermeier, E., and Klebe, G. (2007) Functional classification of protein kinase binding sites using Cavbase. ChemMedChem 2, 1432–1447.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    An, J., Totrov, M., and Abagyan, R. (2005) Pocketome via comprehensive identification and classification of ligand binding envelopes. Mol. Cell Proteomics 4, 752–761.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berman, H. M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T. N., Weissig, H., Shindyalov, I. N., and Bourne, P. E. (2000) The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res 28, 235–242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cavasotto, C. N., Orry, A. J. W., Murgolo, N. J., Czarniecki, M. F., Kocsi, S. A., Hawes, B. E., Neill, K. A., Hine, H., Burton, M. S., Voigt, J. H., Abagyan, R. A., Bayne, M. L., and Monsma, F. J. (2008) Discovery of novel chemotypes to a G-protein-coupled receptor through ligand-steered homology modeling and structure-based virtual screening. J. Med. Chem. 51, 581–588.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bisson, W. H., Cheltsov, A. V., Bruey-Sedano, N., Lin, B., Chen, J., Goldberger, N., May, L. T., Christopoulos, A., Dalton, J. T., Sexton, P. M., Zhang, X. K., and Abagyan, R. (2007) Discovery of antiandrogen activity of nonsteroidal scaffolds of marketed drugs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 11927–11932.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cavasotto, C. N., Orry, A. J. W., and Abagyan, R. A. (2003) Structure-based identification of binding sites, native ligands and potential inhibitors for G-protein coupled receptors. Proteins 51, 423–433.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Word, J. M., Lovell, S. C., Richardson, J. S., and Richardson, D. C. (1999) Asparagine and glutamine: using hydrogen atom contacts in the choice of side-chain amide orientation. J. Mol. Biol. 285, 1735–1747.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davis, A. M., St-Gallay, S. A., and Kleywegt, G. J. (2008) Limitations and lessons in the use of X-ray structural information in drug design. Drug Discov. Today 13, 831–841.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rupp, B. and Segelke, B. (2001) Questions about the structure of the botulinum neurotoxin B light chain in complex with a target peptide. Nat. Struct. Biol. 8, 663–664.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chang, G., Roth, C. B., Reyes, C. L., Pornillos, O., Chen, Y. J., and Chen, A. P. (2006) Retraction. Science 314, 1875.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Joosten, R. P. and Vriend, G. (2007) PDB improvement starts with data deposition. Science 317, 195–196.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kleywegt, G. J. (2007) Crystallographic refinement of ligand complexes. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 63, 94–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kleywegt, G. J., Harris, M. R., Zou, J.-Y., Taylor, T. C., Wahlby, A., and Jones, T. A. (2004) The Uppsala electron-density server. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 60, 2240–2249.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brunger, A. T. and Karplus, M. (1988) Polar hydrogen positions in proteins: empirical energy placement and neutron diffraction comparison. Proteins 4, 148–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hooft, R. W., Sander, C., and Vriend, G. (1996) Positioning hydrogen atoms by optimizing hydrogen-bond networks in protein structures. Proteins 26, 363–376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spassov, V. Z. and Yan, L. A. (2008) Fast and accurate computational approach to protein ionization. Protein Sci. 17, 1955–1970.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Labute, P. (2009) Protonate3D: assignment of ionization states and hydrogen coordinates to macromolecular structures. Proteins 75, 187–205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Labute, P. (2008) The generalized Born/volume integral implicit solvent model: estimation of the free energy of hydration using London dispersion instead of atomic surface area. J. Comput. Chem. 29, 1693–1698.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abagyan, R. and Totrov, M. (1994) Biased probability Monte Carlo conformational searches and electrostatic calculations for peptides and proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 235, 983–1002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bottegoni, G., Kufareva, I., Totrov, M., and Abagyan, R. (2008) A new method for ligand docking to flexible receptors by dual alanine scanning and refinement (SCARE). J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 22, 311–325.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reynolds, K., Katritch, V., and Abagyan, R. (2009) Identifying conformational changes of {beta}-2 adrenoceptor that enable accurate prediction of ligand/receptor interactions and screening for GPCR modulators. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 23, 273–288.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reynolds, K., Katritch, V., Abagyan, R. (2008) 3D structure and modeling of GPCRs: implications for drug discovery. In Shifting Paradigms in G-Protein Coupled Receptors, Gilchrist, Ed. Willey & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kufareva, I., Abagyan, R. (2009) Predicting Molecular Interactions in Structural Proteomics. In Computational Protein-Protein Interactions, Nussinov, R., Schreiber, G., Eds. Taylor and Francis, CRC press.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bairoch, A., Apweiler, R., Wu, C. H., Barker, W. C., Boeckmann, B., Ferro, S., Gasteiger, E., Huang, H., Lopez, R., Magrane, M., Martin, M. J., Natale, D. A., O’Donovan, C., Redaschi, N., and Yeh, L.-S. L. (2005) The universal protein resource (UniProt). Nucleic Acids Res. 33, D154–D159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boeckmann, B., Blatter, M.-C., Famiglietti, L., Hinz, U., Lane, L., Roechert, B., and Bairoch, A. (2005) Protein variety and functional diversity: Swiss-Prot annotation in its biological context. C. R. Biol. 328, 882–899.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    McLachlan, A. D. (1979) Gene duplications in the structural evolution of chymotrypsin. J. Mol. Biol. 128, 49–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Laudet, B. A., Barette, C., Dulery, V., Renaudet, O., Dumy, P., Metz, A., Prudent, R., Deshiere, A., Dideberg, O., Filhol, O., and Cochet, C. (2007) Structure-based design of small peptide inhibitors of protein kinase CK2 subunit interaction. Biochem. J. 408, 363–373.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mallya, M., Phillips, R. L., Saldanha, S. A., Gooptu, B., Brown, S. C. L., Termine, D. J., Shirvani, A. M., Wu, Y., Sifers, R. N., Abagyan, R., and Lomas, D. A. (2007) Small molecules block the polymerization of Z alpha1-antitrypsin and increase the clearance of intracellular aggregates. J. Med. Chem. 50, 5357–5363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Abagyan, R., Batalov, S., Cardozo, T., Totrov, M., Webber, J., and Zhou, Y. (1997) Homology modeling with internal coordinate mechanics: deformation zone mapping and improvements of models via conformational search. Proteins Suppl 1, 29–37.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kufareva, I. and Abagyan, R. (2008) Type-II kinase inhibitor docking, screening, and profiling using modified structures of active kinase states. J. Med. Chem. 51, 7921–7932.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kufareva, I., Laudet, B., Cochet, C., Abagyan, R. (2008) Structure-based discovery of small molecules that modulate kinase activity by disrupting the subunit interaction: application to CK2. Protein Sci 17, Suppl. 1, 265.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kufareva, I. and Abagyan, R. (2008) Strategies to overcome the induced fit effects in molecular docking. In: Hansmann, U. H. E., Meinke, J. H., Mohanty, S., Nadler, W., and Zimmermann, O. (eds.) From Computational Biophysics to Systems Biology (CBSB08). H John von Neumann Institute for Computing (NIC), Jülich, pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Totrov, M. and Abagyan, R. (2001) Protein-ligand docking as an energy optimization problem. In: Raffa, R. B. (ed.) Drug-Receptor Thermodynamics: Introduction and Applications. Willey, Hoboken, pp. 603–624.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Abagyan, R., Totrov, M., and Kuznetsov, D. A. (1994) ICM: a new method for protein modeling and design: applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation. J. Comput. Chem. 15, 488–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nemethy, G., Gibson, K. D., Palmer, K. A., Yoon, C. N., Paterlini, G., Zagari, A., Rumsey, S., and Scheraga, H. A. (1992) Energy parameters in polypeptides. 10. Improved geometrical parameters and nonbonded interactions for use in the ECEPP/3 algorithm, with application to proline-containing peptides. J. Phys. Chem. 96, 6472–6484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Totrov, M. and Abagyan, R. (1997) Flexible protein-ligand docking by global energy optimization in internal coordinates. Proteins 29, 215–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Totrov, M. and Abagyan, R. (1999) Derivation of sensitive discrimination potential for virtual ligand screening. In: Proceedings of the Third Annual International Conference on Computational Molecular Biology, Association for Computing Machinery, Lyon.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schapira, M., Totrov, M., and Abagyan, R. (1999) Prediction of the binding energy for small molecules, peptides and proteins. J. Mol. Recognit. 12, 177–190.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bordner, A. J. and Abagyan, R.(2006) Ab initio prediction of peptide-MHC binding geometry for diverse class I MHC allotypes. Proteins 63, 512–526.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bursulaya, B. D., Totrov, M., Abagyan, R., and Brooks, C. L. III. (2003) Comparative study of several algorithms for flexible ligand docking. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 17, 755–763.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Clark, R. D. and Webster-Clark, D. J. (2008) Managing bias in ROC curves. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 22, 141–146.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Moitessier, N., Englebienne, P., Lee, D., Lawandi, J., and Corbeil, C. R. (2007) Towards the development of universal, fast and highly accurate docking/scoring methods: a long way to go. Br. J. Pharmacol. 153, S7–S26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nelder, J. A. and Mead, R. (1965) A simplex method for function minimization. Comput. J. 7, 308–313.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bottegoni, G., Kufareva, I., Totrov, M., Abagyan, R. (2009) Four-Dimensional Docking: A Fast and Accurate Account of Discrete Receptor Flexibility in Ligand Docking. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 52, 397–406. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press, a part of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruben Abagyan
    • 1
  • Irina Kufareva
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Molecular BiologyThe Scripps Research InstituteLa JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations