Cargando…
A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation
[Image: see text] Binding free energy (ΔG(bind)) computation can play an important role in prioritizing compounds to be evaluated experimentally on their affinity for target proteins, yet fast and accurate ΔG(bind) calculation remains an elusive task. In this study, we compare the performance of two...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Chemical
Society
2019
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6759767/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31461271 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00609 |
_version_ | 1783453758001250304 |
---|---|
author | Rifai, Eko Aditya van Dijk, Marc Vermeulen, Nico P. E. Yanuar, Arry Geerke, Daan P. |
author_facet | Rifai, Eko Aditya van Dijk, Marc Vermeulen, Nico P. E. Yanuar, Arry Geerke, Daan P. |
author_sort | Rifai, Eko Aditya |
collection | PubMed |
description | [Image: see text] Binding free energy (ΔG(bind)) computation can play an important role in prioritizing compounds to be evaluated experimentally on their affinity for target proteins, yet fast and accurate ΔG(bind) calculation remains an elusive task. In this study, we compare the performance of two popular end-point methods, i.e., linear interaction energy (LIE) and molecular mechanics/Poisson–Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA), with respect to their ability to correlate calculated binding affinities of 27 thieno[3,2-d]pyrimidine-6-carboxamide-derived sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) inhibitors with experimental data. Compared with the standard single-trajectory setup of MM/PBSA, our study elucidates that LIE allows to obtain direct (“absolute”) values for SIRT1 binding free energies with lower compute requirements, while the accuracy in calculating relative values for ΔG(bind) is comparable (Pearson’s r = 0.72 and 0.64 for LIE and MM/PBSA, respectively). We also investigate the potential of combining multiple docking poses in iterative LIE models and find that Boltzmann-like weighting of outcomes of simulations starting from different poses can retrieve appropriate binding orientations. In addition, we find that in this particular case study the LIE and MM/PBSA models can be optimized by neglecting the contributions from electrostatic and polar interactions to the ΔG(bind) calculations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6759767 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | American Chemical
Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67597672019-09-26 A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation Rifai, Eko Aditya van Dijk, Marc Vermeulen, Nico P. E. Yanuar, Arry Geerke, Daan P. J Chem Inf Model [Image: see text] Binding free energy (ΔG(bind)) computation can play an important role in prioritizing compounds to be evaluated experimentally on their affinity for target proteins, yet fast and accurate ΔG(bind) calculation remains an elusive task. In this study, we compare the performance of two popular end-point methods, i.e., linear interaction energy (LIE) and molecular mechanics/Poisson–Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA), with respect to their ability to correlate calculated binding affinities of 27 thieno[3,2-d]pyrimidine-6-carboxamide-derived sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) inhibitors with experimental data. Compared with the standard single-trajectory setup of MM/PBSA, our study elucidates that LIE allows to obtain direct (“absolute”) values for SIRT1 binding free energies with lower compute requirements, while the accuracy in calculating relative values for ΔG(bind) is comparable (Pearson’s r = 0.72 and 0.64 for LIE and MM/PBSA, respectively). We also investigate the potential of combining multiple docking poses in iterative LIE models and find that Boltzmann-like weighting of outcomes of simulations starting from different poses can retrieve appropriate binding orientations. In addition, we find that in this particular case study the LIE and MM/PBSA models can be optimized by neglecting the contributions from electrostatic and polar interactions to the ΔG(bind) calculations. American Chemical Society 2019-08-28 2019-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6759767/ /pubmed/31461271 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00609 Text en Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society This is an open access article published under a Creative Commons Non-Commercial No Derivative Works (CC-BY-NC-ND) Attribution License (http://pubs.acs.org/page/policy/authorchoice_ccbyncnd_termsofuse.html) , which permits copying and redistribution of the article, and creation of adaptations, all for non-commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Rifai, Eko Aditya van Dijk, Marc Vermeulen, Nico P. E. Yanuar, Arry Geerke, Daan P. A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation |
title | A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA
Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation |
title_full | A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA
Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation |
title_fullStr | A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA
Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA
Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation |
title_short | A Comparative Linear Interaction Energy and MM/PBSA
Study on SIRT1–Ligand Binding Free Energy Calculation |
title_sort | comparative linear interaction energy and mm/pbsa
study on sirt1–ligand binding free energy calculation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6759767/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31461271 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00609 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rifaiekoaditya acomparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT vandijkmarc acomparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT vermeulennicope acomparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT yanuararry acomparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT geerkedaanp acomparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT rifaiekoaditya comparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT vandijkmarc comparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT vermeulennicope comparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT yanuararry comparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation AT geerkedaanp comparativelinearinteractionenergyandmmpbsastudyonsirt1ligandbindingfreeenergycalculation |