Understanding Cryptic Pocket Formation in Protein Targets by Enhanced Sampling Simulations

被引:132
|
作者
Oleinikovas, Vladimiras [1 ]
Saladino, Giorgio [1 ]
Cossins, Benjamin P. [3 ]
Gervasio, Francesco L. [2 ]
机构
[1] UCL, Dept Chem, London WC1E 6BT, England
[2] UCL, Inst Struct & Mol Biol, London WC1E 6BT, England
[3] UCB Pharma, Slough SL1 3WE, Berks, England
基金
英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会; 英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词
MOLECULAR-DYNAMICS; DRUG DISCOVERY; BINDING-SITE; ENERGY LANDSCAPE; HIGH-THROUGHPUT; FORCE-FIELDS; KINASE; METADYNAMICS; DRUGGABILITY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1021/jacs.6b05425
中图分类号
O6 [化学];
学科分类号
0703 ;
摘要
Cryptic pockets, that is, sites on protein targets that only become apparent when drugs bind, provide a promising alternative to classical binding sites for drug development. Here, we investigate the nature and dynamical properties of cryptic sites in four pharmacologically relevant targets, while comparing the efficacy of various simulation based approaches in discovering them. We find that the studied cryptic sites do not correspond to local minima in the computed conformational free energy landscape of the unliganded proteins. They thus promptly close in all of the molecular dynamics simulations performed, irrespective of the force-field used. Temperature-based enhanced sampling approaches, such as Parallel Tempering, do not improve the situation, as the entropic term does not help in the opening of the sites. The use of fragment probes helps, as in long simulations occasionally it leads to the opening and binding to the cryptic sites. Our observed mechanism of cryptic site formation is suggestive of an interplay between two classical mechanisms: induced-fit and conformational selection. Employing this insight, we developed a novel Hamiltonian Replica Exchange-based method "SWISH" (Sampling Water Interfaces through Scaled Hamiltonians), which combined with probes resulted in a promising general approach for cryptic site discovery. We also addressed the issue of "false-positives" and propose a simple approach to distinguish them from druggable cryptic pockets. Our simulations, whose cumulative sampling time was more than 200 mu s, help in clarifying the molecular mechanism of pocket formation, providing a solid basis for the choice of an efficient computational method.
引用
收藏
页码:14257 / 14263
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Conformational Flexibility of A Highly Conserved Helix Controls Cryptic Pocket Formation in FtsZ
    Alnami, Aisha
    Norton, Raymond S.
    Pena, Helena Perez
    Haider, Shozeb
    Kozielski, Frank
    JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, 2021, 433 (15)
  • [22] Molecular dynamics and enhanced sampling simulations of a membrane-bound reaction center protein
    LeBard, David N.
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 2013, 245
  • [23] Leveraging Cryptic Ligand Envelopes through Enhanced Molecular Simulations
    Colizzi, Francesco
    JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS, 2024, 16 (02): : 443 - 453
  • [24] Exploring Cryptic Pockets Formation in Targets of Pharmaceutical Interest with SWISH
    Comitani, Federico
    Gervasio, Francesco Luigi
    JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL THEORY AND COMPUTATION, 2018, 14 (06) : 3321 - 3331
  • [26] Enhanced Sampling Simulations of DNA Step Parameters
    Karolak, Aleksandra
    van der Vaart, Arjan
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY, 2014, 35 (32) : 2297 - 2304
  • [27] Method for enhanced sampling in the simulations of dynamical systems
    Svishchev, IM
    Kusalik, PG
    PHYSICAL REVIEW E, 1999, 59 (03): : 3753 - 3755
  • [28] AlphaFold-SFA: Accelerated sampling of cryptic pocket opening, protein-ligand binding and allostery by AlphaFold, slow feature analysis and metadynamics
    Vats, Shray
    Bobrovs, Raitis
    Soderhjelm, Par
    Bhakat, Soumendranath
    PLOS ONE, 2024, 19 (08):
  • [29] Towards Understanding Simulations of Galaxy Formation
    Mitchell, N. L.
    ENVIRONMENT AND THE FORMATION OF GALAXIES: 30 YEARS LATER: PROCEEDINGS OF SYMPOSIUM 2 OF JENAM 2010, 2011, : 221 - 223
  • [30] Enhanced sampling simulations to construct free-energy landscape of protein–partner substrate interaction
    Ikebe J.
    Umezawa K.
    Higo J.
    Biophysical Reviews, 2016, 8 (1) : 45 - 62