Alchemical approach performance in calculating the ligand-binding free energy.

Alchemical binding free energy calculations are one of the most accurate methods for estimating ligand-binding affinity. Assessing the accuracy of the approach over protein targets is one of the most interesting issues. The free energy difference of binding between a protein and a ligand was calculated via the alchemical approach. The alchemical approach exhibits satisfactory accuracy over four targets, including AmpC beta-lactamase (AmpC); glutamate receptor, ionotropic kainate 1 (GluK1); heat shock protein 90 (Hsp90); and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) main protease (Mpro). In particular, the correlation coefficients between calculated binding free energies and the respective experiments over four targets range from 0.56 to 0.86. The affinity computed via free energy perturbation (FEP) simulations is overestimated over the experimental value. Particularly, the electrostatic interaction free energy rules the binding process of ligands to AmpC and GluK1. However, the van der Waals (vdW) interaction free energy plays an important role in the ligand-binding processes of HSP90 and SARS-CoV-2 Mpro. The obtained results associate with the hydrophilic or hydrophobic properties of the ligands. This observation may enhance computer-aided drug design.

Searching for AChE inhibitors from natural compounds by using machine learning and atomistic simulations.

Acetylcholinesterase (AChE) is one of the most important drug targets for Alzheimer's disease treatment. In this work, a combined approach involving machine-learning (ML) model and atomistic simulations was established to predict the ligand-binding affinity to AChE of the natural compounds from VIETHERB database. The trained ML model was first utilized to rapidly and accurately screen the natural compound database for potential AChE inhibitors. Atomistic simulations including molecular docking and steered-molecular dynamics simulations were then used to confirm the ML outcome. Good agreement between ML and atomistic simulations was observed. Twenty compounds were suggested to be able to inhibit AChE. Especially, four of them including geranylgeranyl diphosphate, 2-phosphoglyceric acid, and 2-carboxy-d-arabinitol 1-phosphate, and farnesyl diphosphate are highly potent inhibitors with sub-nanomolar affinities.

Improving ligand-ranking of AutoDock Vina by changing the empirical parameters.

AutoDock Vina (Vina) achieved a very high docking-success rate, p^ , but give a rather low correlation coefficient, R , for binding affinity with respect to experiments. This low correlation can be an obstacle for ranking of ligand-binding affinity, which is the main objective of docking simulations. In this context, we evaluated the dependence of Vina R coefficient upon its empirical parameters. R is affected more by changing the gauss2 and rotation than other terms. The docking-success rate p^ is sensitive to the alterations of the gauss1, gauss2, repulsion, and hydrogen bond parameters. Based on our benchmarks, the parameter set1 has been suggested to be the most optimal. The testing study over 800 complexes indicated that the modified Vina provided higher correlation with experiment Rset1=0.556±0.025 compared with RDefault=0.493±0.028 obtained by the original Vina and RVina1.2=0.503±0.029 by Vina version 1.2. Besides, the modified Vina can be also applied more widely, giving R≥0.500 for 32/48 targets, compared with the default package, giving R≥0.500 for 31/48 targets. In addition, validation calculations for 1036 complexes obtained from version 2019 of PDBbind refined structures showed that the set1 of parameters gave higher correlation coefficient ( Rset1=0.617±0.017 ) than the default package ( RDefault=0.543±0.020 ) and Vina version 1.2 ( RVina1.2=0.540±0.020 ). The version of Vina with set1 of parameters can be downloaded at https://github.com/sontungngo/mvina. The outcomes would enhance the ranking of ligand-binding affinity using Autodock Vina.

Autodock Vina Adopts More Accurate Binding Poses but Autodock4 Forms Better Binding Affinity.

The binding pose and affinity between a ligand and enzyme are very important pieces of information for computer-aided drug design. In the initial stage of a drug discovery project, this information is often obtained by using molecular docking methods. Autodock4 and Autodock Vina are two commonly used open-source and free software tools to perform this task, and each has been cited more than 6000 times in the last ten years. It is of great interest to compare the success rate of the two docking software programs for a large and diverse set of protein-ligand complexes. In this study, we selected 800 protein-ligand complexes for which both PDB structures and experimental binding affinity are available. Docking calculations were performed for these complexes using both Autodock4 and Autodock Vina with different docking options related to computing resource consumption and accuracy. Our calculation results are in good agreement with a previous study that the Vina approach converges much faster than AD4 one. However, interestingly, AD4 shows a better performance than Vina over 21 considered targets, whereas the Vina protocol is better than the AD4 package for 10 other targets. There are 16 complexes for which both the AD4 and Vina protocols fail to produce a reasonable correlation with respected experiments so both are not suitable to use to estimate binding free energies for these cases. In addition, the best docking option for performing the AD4 approach is the long option. However, the short option is the best solution for carrying out Vina docking. The obtained results probably will be useful for future docking studies in deciding which program to use.