The SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge: assessing the reliability and efficiency of binding free energy calculations

被引:0
|
作者
Andrea Rizzi
Travis Jensen
David R. Slochower
Matteo Aldeghi
Vytautas Gapsys
Dimitris Ntekoumes
Stefano Bosisio
Michail Papadourakis
Niel M. Henriksen
Bert L. de Groot
Zoe Cournia
Alex Dickson
Julien Michel
Michael K. Gilson
Michael R. Shirts
David L. Mobley
John D. Chodera
机构
[1] Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center,Computational and Systems Biology Program, Sloan Kettering Institute
[2] Tri-Institutional Training Program in Computational Biology and Medicine,Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering
[3] University of Colorado Boulder,Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences
[4] University of California,Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry
[5] San Diego,Biomedical Research Foundation
[6] Computational Biomolecular Dynamics Group,EaStCHEM School of Chemistry
[7] Academy of Athens,Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
[8] University of Edinburgh,Department of Computational Mathematics, Science and Engineering
[9] Atomwise,Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Department of Chemistry
[10] Michigan State University,undefined
[11] Michigan State University,undefined
[12] University of California,undefined
关键词
SAMPL6; Host–guest; Binding affinity; Free energy calculations; Cucurbit[8]uril; Octa-acid; Sampling;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Approaches for computing small molecule binding free energies based on molecular simulations are now regularly being employed by academic and industry practitioners to study receptor-ligand systems and prioritize the synthesis of small molecules for ligand design. Given the variety of methods and implementations available, it is natural to ask how the convergence rates and final predictions of these methods compare. In this study, we describe the concept and results for the SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge, the first challenge from the SAMPL series focusing on the assessment of convergence properties and reproducibility of binding free energy methodologies. We provided parameter files, partial charges, and multiple initial geometries for two octa-acid (OA) and one cucurbit[8]uril (CB8) host–guest systems. Participants submitted binding free energy predictions as a function of the number of force and energy evaluations for seven different alchemical and physical-pathway (i.e., potential of mean force and weighted ensemble of trajectories) methodologies implemented with the GROMACS, AMBER, NAMD, or OpenMM simulation engines. To rank the methods, we developed an efficiency statistic based on bias and variance of the free energy estimates. For the two small OA binders, the free energy estimates computed with alchemical and potential of mean force approaches show relatively similar variance and bias as a function of the number of energy/force evaluations, with the attach-pull-release (APR), GROMACS expanded ensemble, and NAMD double decoupling submissions obtaining the greatest efficiency. The differences between the methods increase when analyzing the CB8-quinine system, where both the guest size and correlation times for system dynamics are greater. For this system, nonequilibrium switching (GROMACS/NS-DS/SB) obtained the overall highest efficiency. Surprisingly, the results suggest that specifying force field parameters and partial charges is insufficient to generally ensure reproducibility, and we observe differences between seemingly converged predictions ranging approximately from 0.3 to 1.0 kcal/mol, even with almost identical simulations parameters and system setup (e.g., Lennard-Jones cutoff, ionic composition). Further work will be required to completely identify the exact source of these discrepancies. Among the conclusions emerging from the data, we found that Hamiltonian replica exchange—while displaying very small variance—can be affected by a slowly-decaying bias that depends on the initial population of the replicas, that bidirectional estimators are significantly more efficient than unidirectional estimators for nonequilibrium free energy calculations for systems considered, and that the Berendsen barostat introduces non-negligible artifacts in expanded ensemble simulations.
引用
收藏
页码:601 / 633
页数:32
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge: assessing the reliability and efficiency of binding free energy calculations
    Rizzi, Andrea
    Jensen, Travis
    Slochower, David R.
    Aldeghi, Matteo
    Gapsys, Vytautas
    Ntekoumes, Dimitris
    Bosisio, Stefano
    Papadourakis, Michail
    Henriksen, Niel M.
    de Groot, Bert L.
    Cournia, Zoe
    Dickson, Alex
    Michel, Julien
    Gilson, Michael K.
    Shirts, Michael R.
    Mobley, David L.
    Chodera, John D.
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN, 2020, 34 (05) : 601 - 633
  • [2] SAMPL6 host–guest challenge: binding free energies via a multistep approach
    Yiğitcan Eken
    Prajay Patel
    Thomas Díaz
    Michael R. Jones
    Angela K. Wilson
    Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 2018, 32 : 1097 - 1115
  • [3] On the NS-DSSB unidirectional estimates in the SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge
    Piero Procacci
    Marina Macchiagodena
    Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 2021, 35 : 1055 - 1065
  • [4] On the NS-DSSB unidirectional estimates in the SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge
    Procacci, Piero
    Macchiagodena, Marina
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN, 2021, 35 (10) : 1055 - 1065
  • [5] Blinded predictions of standard binding free energies: lessons learned from the SAMPL6 challenge
    Michail Papadourakis
    Stefano Bosisio
    Julien Michel
    Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 2018, 32 : 1047 - 1058
  • [6] Overview of the SAMPL6 host–guest binding affinity prediction challenge
    Andrea Rizzi
    Steven Murkli
    John N. McNeill
    Wei Yao
    Matthew Sullivan
    Michael K. Gilson
    Michael W. Chiu
    Lyle Isaacs
    Bruce C. Gibb
    David L. Mobley
    John D. Chodera
    Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 2018, 32 : 937 - 963
  • [7] Predicting ligand binding affinity using on- and off-rates for the SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge
    Tom Dixon
    Samuel D. Lotz
    Alex Dickson
    Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 2018, 32 : 1001 - 1012
  • [8] SAMPL6 host-guest challenge: binding free energies via a multistep approach
    Eken, Yigitcan
    Patel, Prajay
    Diaz, Thomas
    Jones, Michael R.
    Wilson, Angela K.
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN, 2018, 32 (10) : 1097 - 1115
  • [9] Blinded predictions of standard binding free energies: lessons learned from the SAMPL6 challenge
    Papadourakis, Michail
    Bosisio, Stefano
    Michel, Julien
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN, 2018, 32 (10) : 1047 - 1058
  • [10] Predicting ligand binding affinity using on- and off-rates for the SAMPL6 SAMPLing challenge
    Dixon, Tom
    Lotz, Samuel D.
    Dickson, Alex
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN, 2018, 32 (10) : 1001 - 1012