ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2017
Attach-Pull-Release Calculations of Ligand Binding and Conformational Changes on the First BRD4 Bromodomain.
Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- HalogenatedRSC advances · 2025Article
- Absolute Binding Free Energies with OneOPES.The journal of physical chemistry letters · 2024Article
- Impact of protein conformations on binding free energy calculations in the beta-secretase 1 system.Journal of computational chemistry · 2024Article
- BAT2: an Open-Source Tool for Flexible, Automated, and Low Cost Absolute Binding Free Energy Calculations.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024Article
- Machine Learning Methods as a Cost-Effective Alternative to Physics-Based Binding Free Energy Calculations.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The role of loop dynamics in the prediction of ligand-protein binding enthalpy.Chemical science · 2023Article
- Accurate Host-Guest Binding Free Energies Using the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2023Article
- AMBER Free Energy Tools: A New Framework for the Design of Optimized Alchemical Transformation Pathways.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2023Article
- Catalysis by [GaChemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2022Article
- Article
- Correction Schemes for Absolute Binding Free Energies Involving Lipid Bilayers.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2022Article
- First Principles Calculation of Protein-Protein Dimer Affinities of ALS-Associated SOD1 Mutants.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Article
- On the NS-DSSB unidirectional estimates in the SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2021Article
- Scaffold Hopping Transformations Using Auxiliary Restraints for Calculating Accurate Relative Binding Free Energies.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2021Article
- Automation of absolute protein-ligand binding free energy calculations for docking refinement and compound evaluation.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Implicit ligand theory for relative binding free energies: II. An estimator based on control variates.Journal of physics communications · 2020Article
- Molecular Structure, Binding Affinity, and Biological Activity in the Epigenome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Best Practices for Alchemical Free Energy Calculations [Article v1.0].Living journal of computational molecular science · 2020Article
- DeltaDelta neural networks for lead optimization of small molecule potency.Chemical science · 2019Article
- Binding Thermodynamics of Host-Guest Systems with SMIRNOFF99Frosst 1.0.5 from the Open Force Field Initiative.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bromodomains, protein domains involved in epigenetic regulation, are able to bind small molecules with high affinity. In the present study, we report free energy calculations for the binding of seven ligands to the first BRD4 bromodomain, using the attach-pull-release (APR) method to compute the reversible work of removing the ligands from the binding site and then allowing the protein to relax conformationally. We test three different water models, TIP3P, TIP4PEw, and SPC/E, as well as the GAFF and GAFF2 parameter sets for the ligands. Our simulations show that the apo crystal structure of BRD4 is only metastable, with a structural transition happening in the absence of the ligand typically after 20 ns of simulation. We compute the free energy change for this transition with a separate APR calculation on the free protein and include its contribution to the ligand binding free energies, which generally causes an underestimation of the affinities. By testing different water models and ligand parameters, we are also able to assess their influence in our results and determine which one produces the best agreement with the experimental data. Both free energies associated with the conformational change and ligand binding are affected by the choice of water model, with the two sets of ligand parameters affecting their binding free energies to a lesser degree. Across all six combinations of water model and ligand potential function, the Pearson correlation coefficients between calculated and experimental binding free energies range from 0.55 to 0.83, and the root-mean-square errors range from 1.4-3.2 kcal/mol. The current protocol also yields encouraging preliminary results when used to assess the relative stability of ligand poses generated by docking or other methods, as illustrated for two different ligands. Our method takes advantage of the high performance provided by graphics processing units and can readily be applied to other ligands as well as other protein systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.