Abstract
Computational prediction of protein–ligand binding involves initial determination of the binding mode and subsequent evaluation of the strength of the protein–ligand interactions, which directly correlates with ligand binding affinities. As a consequence of increasing computer power, rigorous approaches to calculate protein–ligand binding affinities, such as free energy perturbation (FEP) methods, are becoming an essential part of the toolbox of computer-aided drug design. In this chapter, we provide a general overview of these methods and introduce the QFEP modules, which are open-source API workflows based on our molecular dynamics (MD) package Q. The module QligFEP allows estimation of relative binding affinities along ligand series, while QresFEP is a module to estimate binding affinity shifts caused by single-point mutations of the protein. We herein provide guidelines for the use of each of these modules based on data extracted from ligand-design projects. While these modules are stand-alone, the combined use of the two workflows in a drug-design project yields complementary perspectives of the ligand binding problem, providing two sides of the same coin. The selected case studies illustrate how to use QFEP to approach the two key questions associated with ligand binding prediction: identifying the most favorable binding mode from different alternatives and establishing structure–affinity relationships that allow the rational optimization of hit compounds.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wang J, Wolf RM, Caldwell JW et al (2004) Development and testing of a general Amber force field. J Comput Chem 25:1157–1174
Hornak V, Abel R, Okur A et al (2006) Comparison of multiple amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters, vol 65, p 712
Huang J, Mackerell AD (2013) CHARMM36 all-atom additive protein force field: validation based on comparison to NMR data. J Comput Chem 34:2135–2145
Robertson MJ, Tirado-Rives J, Jorgensen WL (2015) Improved peptide and protein torsional energetics with the OPLS-AA force field. J Chem Theory Comput 11:3499–3509
Dodda LS, De VIC, Tirado-Rives J et al (2017) LigParGen web server: an automatic OPLS-AA parameter generator for organic ligands. Nucleic Acids Res 45:W331–W336
Il LK, Rui H, Pastor RW et al (2011) Brownian dynamics simulations of ion transport through the VDAC. Biophys J 100:611–619
Wong CF, McCammon JA (1986) Dynamics and Design of Enzymes and Inhibitors. J Am Chem Soc 108:3830–3832
Cournia Z, Allen B, Sherman W (2017) Relative binding free energy calculations in drug discovery: recent advances and practical considerations. J Chem Inf Model 57:2911–2937
Loeffler HH, Michel J, Woods C (2015) FESetup: automating setup for alchemical free energy simulations. J Chem Inf Model 55:2485–2490
Liu S, Wu Y, Lin T et al (2013) Lead optimization mapper: automating free energy calculations for lead optimization. J Comput Aided Mol Des 27:755–770
Homeyer N, Gohlke H (2013) FEW: a workflow tool for free energy calculations of ligand binding. J Comput Chem 34:965–973
Wang L, Wu Y, Deng Y et al (2015) Accurate and reliable prediction of relative ligand binding potency in prospective drug discovery by way of a modern free-energy calculation protocol and force field. J Am Chem Soc 137:2695–2703
Christ CD, Fox T (2014) Accuracy assessment and automation of free energy calculations for drug design. J Chem Inf Model 54:108–120
Jespers W, Esguerra M, Åqvist J et al (2019) QligFEP: an automated workflow for small molecule free energy calculations in Q. J Cheminform 11:1–16
Jespers W, Isaksen GV, Andberg TAH et al (2019) QresFEP: an automated protocol for free energy calculations of protein mutations in Q. J Chem Theory Comput 15:5461–5473
Marelius J, Kolmodin K, Feierberg I et al (1998) Q: a molecular dynamics program for free energy calculations and empirical valence bond simulations in biomolecular systems. J Mol Graph Model 16:213–225
Bauer P, Barrozo A, Purg M et al (2018) Q6: A comprehensive toolkit for empirical valence bond and related free energy calculations. 7:388–395
Frenkel D, Smit B (2002) Free Energy Calculations. In: Understanding Molecular Simulation. Academic Press, pp 167–200
Polishchuk PG, Madzhidov TI, Varnek A (2013) Estimation of the size of drug-like chemical space based on GDB-17 data. J Comput Aided Mol Des 27:675–679
Reymond JL (2015) The chemical space project. Acc Chem Res 48:722–730
Michel J, Essex JW (2010) Prediction of protein-ligand binding affinity by free energy simulations: assumptions, pitfalls and expectations. J Comput Aided Mol Des 24:639–658
Gapsys V, Michielssens S, Seeliger D et al (2015) Pmx: automated protein structure and topology generation for alchemical perturbations. J Comput Chem 36:348–354
Lind C, Esguerra M, Jespers W et al (2019) Free energy calculations of RNA interactions. 162–163:85–95
Liu S, Wang L, Mobley DL (2015) Is ring breaking feasible in relative binding free energy calculations? J Chem Inf Model 55:727–735
Zhukov A, Andrews SP, Errey JC et al (2011) Biophysical mapping of the adenosine a 2A receptor. J Med Chem 54:4312–4323
Steinbrecher T, Zhu C, Wang L et al (2017) Predicting the effect of amino acid single-point mutations on protein stability—large-scale validation of MD-based relative free energy calculations. J Mol Biol 429:948–963
Boukharta L, Gutiérrez-de-Terán H, Åqvist J (2014) Computational prediction of alanine scanning and ligand binding energetics in G-protein coupled receptors. PLoS Comput Biol 10:e1003585
Keränen H, Åqvist J, Gutiérrez-de-Terán H (2015) Free energy calculations of A 2A adenosine receptor mutation effects on agonist binding. 51:3522–3525
Keränen H, Gutiérrez-de-Terán H, Åqvist J (2014) Structural and energetic effects of A2A adenosine receptor mutations on agonist and antagonist binding. PLoS One 9:e108492
Nøhr AC, Jespers W, Shehata MA et al (2017) The GPR139 reference agonists 1a and 7c, and tryptophan and phenylalanine share a common binding site. Sci Rep 7:1–9
Jespers W, Oliveira A, Prieto-Díaz R et al (2017) Structure-Based Design of Potent and Selective Ligands at the Four Adenosine Receptors. 22:1–17
Vasile S, Esguerra M, Jespers W et al (2018) Characterization of ligand binding to GPCRs through computational methods. In: Methods in molecular biology. Humana Press, New York, NY, pp 23–44
Xu B, Vasile S, Østergaard S et al (2018) Elucidation of the binding mode of the Carboxyterminal region of peptide YY to the human Y2 receptor. Mol Pharmacol 93:323–334
Jespers W, Verdon G, Azuaje J et al (2019) X-ray crystallography and free energy calculations reveal the binding mechanism of a 2A adenosine receptor antagonists. ChemRxiv:1–11
Lee FS, Warshel A (1992) A local reaction field method for fast evaluation of long-range electrostatic interactions in molecular simulations. J Chem Phys 97:3100–3107
Isaksen GV, Åqvist J, Brandsdal BO (2016) Enzyme surface rigidity tunes the temperature dependence of catalytic rates. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:7822–7827
Bjelic S, Brandsdal BO, Åqvist J (2008) Cold adaptation of enzyme reaction rates. Biochemistry 47:10049–10057
Zwanzig RW (1954) High-temperature equation of state by a perturbation method. I. Nonpolar gases. J Chem Phys 22:1420
Pohorille A, Jarzynski C, Chipot C (2010) Good practices in free-energy calculations. J Phys Chem B 114:10235–10253
Brandsdal BO, Österberg F, Almlöf M et al (2003) Free energy calculations and ligand binding. Adv Protein Chem 66:123–158
Bennett CH (1976) Efficient estimation of free energy differences from Monte Carlo data. J Comput Phys 22:245–268
Tembre BL, Mc Cammon JA (1984) Ligand-receptor interactions. Comput Chem 8:281–283
Jorgensen WL (2004) The many roles of computation in drug discovery. Science (80- ) 303:1813–1818
Jazayeri A, Andrews SP, Marshall FH (2017) Structurally enabled discovery of adenosine a 2A receptor antagonists. Chem Rev 117:21–37
Gutiérrez-de-Terán H, Sallander J, Sotelo E (2017) Structure-based rational Design of Adenosine Receptor Ligands. Curr Top Med Chem 17:40–58
Minetti P, Tinti MO, Carminati P et al (2005) 2-n-butyl-9-methyl-8-[1,2,3]triazol-2-yl-9H-purin-6-ylamine and analogues as A2A adenosine receptor antagonists. Design, synthesis, and pharmacological characterization. J Med Chem 48:6887–6896
Liu W, Chun E, Thompson AA et al (2012) Structural basis for allosteric regulation of GPCRs by sodium ions. Science 337:232–236
Madhavi Sastry G, Adzhigirey M, Day T et al (2013) Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments. J Comput Aided Mol Des 27:221–234
Jespers W, Schiedel AC, Heitman LH et al (2018) Structural mapping of adenosine receptor mutations: ligand binding and signaling mechanisms. Trends Pharmacol Sci 39:75–89
Lebon G, Warne T, Edwards PC et al (2011) Agonist-bound adenosine A2A receptor structures reveal common features of GPCR activation. Nature 474:521–525
Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Hartshorn MJ et al (2003) Improved protein-ligand docking using GOLD. 52:609–623
Esguerra M, Siretskiy A, Bello X et al (2016) GPCR-ModSim: a comprehensive web based solution for modeling G-protein coupled receptors. Nucleic Acids Res 44:W455–W462
Åqvist J (1990) Ion-water interaction potentials derived from free energy perturbation simulations. J Phys Chem 94:8021–8024
Vanommeslaeghe K, Hatcher E, Acharya C et al (2010) CHARMM general force field: a force field for drug-like molecules compatible with the CHARMM all-atom additive biological force fields. J Comput Chem 31:671–690
Wang J, Wang W, Kollman PA et al (2006) Automatic atom type and bond type perception in molecular mechanical calculations. J Mol Graph Model 25:247–260
Banks JL, Beard HS, Cao Y et al (2005) Integrated modeling program, applied chemical theory (IMPACT). J Comput Chem 26:1752–1780
Bharate SBSS, Singh B, Kachler S et al (2016) Discovery of 7-(Prolinol- N -yl)-2-phenylamino-thiazolo[5,4- d ]pyrimidines as novel non-nucleoside partial agonists for the a 2A adenosine receptor: prediction from molecular modeling. J Med Chem 59:5922–5928
Gutiérrez-de-Terán H, Keränen H, Azuaje J et al (2015) Computer-aided design of GPCR ligands. Methods Mol Biol 1272:271–291
Vasile S, Esguerra M, Jespers W et al (2018) Characterization of ligand binding to GPCRs through computational methods. Methods Mol Biol:23–44
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Jespers, W., Åqvist, J., Gutiérrez-de-Terán, H. (2021). Free Energy Calculations for Protein–Ligand Binding Prediction. In: Ballante, F. (eds) Protein-Ligand Interactions and Drug Design. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 2266. Humana, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-1209-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-1209-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-0716-1208-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-0716-1209-5
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols