Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25189630›Full record

ArticleThe journal of physical chemistry. B2015

Distinguishing binders from false positives by free energy calculations: fragment screening against the flap site of HIV protease.

Nanjie Deng, Stefano Forli, Peng He, Alex Perryman, Lauren Wickstrom, R S K Vijayan, Theresa Tiefenbrunn, David Stout, Emilio Gallicchio, Arthur J Olson and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of physical chemistry. B, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Evaluation of log P, pKJournal of computer-aided molecular design · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Nanjie DengCenter for Biophysics & Computational Biology/ICMS, ‡Department of Chemistry, Temple University , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania19122, United States.
Stefano Forli
Peng He
Alex Perryman
Lauren Wickstrom
R S K Vijayan
Theresa Tiefenbrunn
David Stout
Emilio Gallicchio
Arthur J Olson
Ronald M Levy
Scripps Research Institute · USTemple University · USBorough of Manhattan Community College · USCity University of New York · US

Funding

Project 9P50GM103368 · NIGMS · SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, THE · PI SHARPLESS, KARL BARRY · 2012 to 2016
$20.0M
AutoDock Suite: Next Generation Environment for Drug DesignR01GM069832 · NIGMS · SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, THE · PI FORLI, STEFANO · 2004 to 2025
$10.9M
DYNAMICS OF PEPTIDES AND PROTEINSR01GM030580 · NIGMS · TEMPLE UNIV OF THE COMMONWEALTH · PI LEVY, RONALD · 1985 to 2018
$6.1M
A New Approach to Rapid Protein-Protein DockingR01GM073087 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI BAJAJ, CHANDRAJIT L · 2006 to 2008
$1.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS P50 GM103368NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM030580NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM069832NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM073087NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM30580
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Molecular docking is a powerful tool used in drug discovery and structural biology for predicting the structures of ligand-receptor complexes. However, the accuracy of docking calculations can be limited by factors such as the neglect of protein reorganization in the scoring function; as a result, ligand screening can produce a high rate of false positive hits. Although absolute binding free energy methods still have difficulty in accurately rank-ordering binders, we believe that they can be fruitfully employed to distinguish binders from nonbinders and reduce the false positive rate. Here we study a set of ligands that dock favorably to a newly discovered, potentially allosteric site on the flap of HIV-1 protease. Fragment binding to this site stabilizes a closed form of protease, which could be exploited for the design of allosteric inhibitors. Twenty-three top-ranked protein-ligand complexes from AutoDock were subject to the free energy screening using two methods, the recently developed binding energy analysis method (BEDAM) and the standard double decoupling method (DDM). Free energy calculations correctly identified most of the false positives (≥83%) and recovered all the confirmed binders. The results show a gap averaging ≥3.7 kcal/mol, separating the binders and the false positives. We present a formula that decomposes the binding free energy into contributions from the receptor conformational macrostates, which provides insights into the roles of different binding modes. Our binding free energy component analysis further suggests that improving the treatment for the desolvation penalty associated with the unfulfilled polar groups could reduce the rate of false positive hits in docking. The current study demonstrates that the combination of docking with free energy methods can be very useful for more accurate ligand screening against valuable drug targets.

Indexed as

Molecular Docking SimulationBinding SitesDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHIV ProteaseLigandsProtein BindingProtein ConformationThermodynamicsHIV ProteaseLigandsp16 protease, Human immunodeficiency virus 1

Identifiers

PMID25189630
PMCPMC4306491
OpenAlexW2065837216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.