Assessing the performance of docking, FEP, and MM/GBSA methods on a series of KLK6 inhibitors.

Kallikrein 6 (KLK6) is an attractive drug target for the treatment of neurological diseases and for various cancers. Herein, we explore the accuracy and efficiency of different computational methods and protocols to predict the free energy of binding (ΔGbind) for a series of 49 inhibitors of KLK6. We found that the performance of the methods varied strongly with the tested system. For only one of the three KLK6 datasets, the docking scores obtained with rDock were in good agreement (R2 ≥ 0.5) with experimental values of ΔGbind. A similar result was obtained with MM/GBSA (using the ff14SB force field) calculations based on single minimized structures. Improved binding affinity predictions were obtained with the free energy perturbation (FEP) method, with an overall MUE and RMSE of 0.53 and 0.68 kcal/mol, respectively. Furthermore, in a simulation of a real-world drug discovery project, FEP was able to rank the most potent compounds at the top of the list. These results indicate that FEP can be a promising tool for the structure-based optimization of KLK6 inhibitors.

Methyltransferase Inhibitors: Competing with, or Exploiting the Bound Cofactor.

Protein methyltransferases (PMTs) are enzymes involved in epigenetic mechanisms, DNA repair, and other cellular machineries critical to cellular identity and function, and are an important target class in chemical biology and drug discovery. Central to the enzymatic reaction is the transfer of a methyl group from the cofactor S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) to a substrate protein. Here we review how the essentiality of SAM for catalysis is exploited by chemical inhibitors. Occupying the cofactor binding pocket to compete with SAM can be hindered by the hydrophilic nature of this site, but structural studies of compounds now in the clinic revealed that inhibitors could either occupy juxtaposed pockets to overlap minimally, but sufficiently with the bound cofactor, or induce large conformational remodeling leading to a more druggable binding site. Rather than competing with the cofactor, other inhibitors compete with the substrate and rely on bound SAM, either to allosterically stabilize the substrate binding site, or for direct SAM-inhibitor interactions.