Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31013302›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Middle-way flexible docking: Pose prediction using mixed-resolution Monte Carlo in estrogen receptor α.

Justin Spiriti, Sundar Raman Subramanian, Rohith Palli, Maria Wu, Daniel M Zuckerman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

5 authors.

Justin SpiritiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7338-3012
Sundar Raman SubramanianDepartment of Computational and Systems Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, United States of America.
Rohith PalliDepartment of Computational and Systems Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, United States of America.
Maria WuDepartment of Computational and Systems Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, United States of America.
Daniel M ZuckermanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States of America.

Funding

TrainingP41GM103712 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI FAEDER, JAMES · 2012 to 2021
$16.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM103712
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a vast gulf between the two primary strategies for simulating protein-ligand interactions. Docking methods significantly limit or eliminate protein flexibility to gain great speed at the price of uncontrolled inaccuracy, whereas fully flexible atomistic molecular dynamics simulations are expensive and often suffer from limited sampling. We have developed a flexible docking approach geared especially for highly flexible or poorly resolved targets based on mixed-resolution Monte Carlo (MRMC), which is intended to offer a balance among speed, protein flexibility, and sampling power. The binding region of the protein is treated with a standard atomistic force field, while the remainder of the protein is modeled at the residue level with a Gō model that permits protein flexibility while saving computational cost. Implicit solvation is used. Here we assess three facets of the MRMC approach with implications for other docking studies: (i) the role of receptor flexibility in cross-docking pose prediction; (ii) the use of non-equilibrium candidate Monte Carlo (NCMC) and (iii) the use of pose-clustering in scoring. We examine 61 co-crystallized ligands of estrogen receptor α, an important cancer target known for its flexibility. We also compare the performance of the MRMC approach with Autodock smina. Adding protein flexibility, not surprisingly, leads to significantly lower total energies and stronger interactions between protein and ligand, but notably we document the important role of backbone flexibility in the improvement. The improved backbone flexibility also leads to improved performance relative to smina. Somewhat unexpectedly, our implementation of NCMC leads to only modestly improved sampling of ligand poses. Overall, the addition of protein flexibility improves the performance of docking, as measured by energy-ranked poses, but we do not find significant improvements based on cluster information or the use of NCMC. We discuss possible improvements for the model including alternative coarse-grained force fields, improvements to the treatment of solvation, and adding additional types of NCMC moves.

Indexed as

Binding SitesCrystallography, X-RayEstrogen Receptor alphaLigandsMolecular Docking SimulationMonte Carlo MethodProtein Conformation, alpha-HelicalSoftwareEstrogen Receptor alphaLigands

Identifiers

PMID31013302
PMCPMC6478315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.