Comparison of thermodynamic integration and Bennett acceptance ratio for calculating relative protein-ligand binding free energies

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 1024-1034 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita de Ruiter ◽  
Stefan Boresch ◽  
Chris Oostenbrink
Keyword(s):  
Ligand Binding ◽  
Thermodynamic Integration ◽  
Free Energies ◽  
Acceptance Ratio ◽  
Bennett Acceptance Ratio ◽  
Binding Free Energies

scholarly journals Protein-ligand free energies of binding from full-protein DFT calculations: convergence and choice of exchange-correlation functional

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lennart Gundelach ◽  
Christofer S Tautermann ◽  
Thomas Fox ◽  
Chris-Kriton Skylaris
Keyword(s):  
Drug Discovery ◽  
Ligand Binding ◽  
Dft Calculations ◽  
Quantum Mechanical ◽  
Free Energies ◽  
Ligand Interaction ◽  
Exchange Correlation ◽  
Ligand Free ◽  
Protein Ligand Interaction ◽  
Binding Free Energies

The accurate prediction of protein-ligand binding free energies with tractable computational methods has the potential to revolutionize drug discovery. Modeling the protein-ligand interaction at a quantum mechanical level, instead of...

scholarly journals Alchemical Absolute Protein-Ligand Binding Free Energies for Drug Design

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuriy Khalak ◽  
Gary Tresdern ◽  
Matteo Aldeghi ◽  
Hannah Magdalena Baumann ◽  
David L. Mobley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Free Energy ◽  
Drug Discovery ◽  
Drug Design ◽  
Ligand Binding ◽  
Binding Free Energy ◽  
Free Energy Calculations ◽  
Free Energies ◽  
Energy Calculations ◽  
Binding Free Energy Calculations ◽  
Binding Free Energies

The recent advances in relative protein-ligand binding free energy calculations have shown the value of alchemical methods in drug discovery. Accurately assessing absolute binding free energies, although highly desired, remains...

Receptor–Ligand Binding Free Energies from a Consecutive Histograms Monte Carlo Sampling Method

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 6645-6655
Author(s):  
Hao Liu ◽  
Jianpeng Deng ◽  
Zhou Luo ◽  
Yawei Lin ◽  
Kenneth M. Merz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Ligand Binding ◽  
Sampling Method ◽  
Monte Carlo Sampling ◽  
Free Energies ◽  
Receptor Ligand ◽  
Binding Free Energies

A water-swap reaction coordinate for the calculation of absolute protein–ligand binding free energies

2011 ◽  
Vol 134 (5) ◽  
pp. 054114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Woods ◽  
Maturos Malaisree ◽  
Supot Hannongbua ◽  
Adrian J. Mulholland
Keyword(s):  
Ligand Binding ◽  
Reaction Coordinate ◽  
Free Energies ◽  
Binding Free Energies

scholarly journals Alchemical Free Energy Estimators and Molecular Dynamics Engines: Accuracy, Precision and Reproducibility

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Wade ◽  
Agastya Bhati ◽  
Shunzhou Wan ◽  
Peter Coveney
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Dynamics ◽  
Free Energy ◽  
Binding Free Energy ◽  
Thermodynamic Integration ◽  
Free Energy Perturbation ◽  
Free Energies ◽  
Ensemble Averaging ◽  
Relative Binding ◽  
Energy Perturbation ◽  
Binding Free Energies

The binding free energy between a ligand and its target protein is an essential quantity to know at all stages of the drug discovery pipeline. Assessing this value computationally can offer insight into where efforts should be focused in the pursuit of effective therapeutics to treat myriad diseases. In this work we examine the computation of alchemical relative binding free energies with an eye to assessing reproducibility across popular molecular dynamics packages and free energy estimators. The focus of this work is on 54 ligand transformations from a diverse set of protein targets: MCL1, PTP1B, TYK2, CDK2 and thrombin. These targets are studied with three popular molecular dynamics packages: OpenMM, NAMD2 and NAMD3. Trajectories collected with these packages are used to compare relative binding free energies calculated with thermodynamic integration and free energy perturbation methods. The resulting binding free energies show good agreement between molecular dynamics packages with an average mean unsigned error between packages of 0.5 $kcal/mol$ The correlation between packages is very good with the lowest Spearman's, Pearson's and Kendall's tau correlation coefficient between two packages being 0.91, 0.89 and 0.74 respectively. Agreement between thermodynamic integration and free energy perturbation is shown to be very good when using ensemble averaging.

scholarly journals Binding thermodynamics of host-guest systems with SMIRNOFF99Frosst 1.0.5 from the Open Force Field Initiative

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Slochower ◽  
Niel Henriksen ◽  
Lee-Ping Wang ◽  
John Chodera ◽  
David Mobley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ligand Binding ◽  
Force Field ◽  
Small Molecule ◽  
Force Fields ◽  
Free Energy Calculations ◽  
Model Systems ◽  
Conformational Space ◽  
Free Energies ◽  
Binding Thermodynamics ◽  
Binding Free Energies

<div><div><div><p>Designing ligands that bind their target biomolecules with high affinity and specificity is a key step in small- molecule drug discovery, but accurately predicting protein-ligand binding free energies remains challenging. Key sources of errors in the calculations include inadequate sampling of conformational space, ambiguous protonation states, and errors in force fields. Noncovalent complexes between a host molecule with a binding cavity and a drug-like guest molecules have emerged as powerful model systems. As model systems, host-guest complexes reduce many of the errors in more complex protein-ligand binding systems, as their small size greatly facilitates conformational sampling, and one can choose systems that avoid ambiguities in protonation states. These features, combined with their ease of experimental characterization, make host-guest systems ideal model systems to test and ultimately optimize force fields in the context of binding thermodynamics calculations.</p><p><br></p><p>The Open Force Field Initiative aims to create a modern, open software infrastructure for automatically generating and assessing force fields using data sets. The first force field to arise out of this effort, named SMIRNOFF99Frosst, has approximately one tenth the number of parameters, in version 1.0.5, compared to typical general small molecule force fields, such as GAFF. Here, we evaluate the accuracy of this initial force field, using free energy calculations of 43 α and β-cyclodextrin host-guest pairs for which experimental thermodynamic data are available, and compare with matched calculations using two versions of GAFF. For all three force fields, we used TIP3P water and AM1-BCC charges. The calculations are performed using the attach-pull-release (APR) method as implemented in the open source package, pAPRika. For binding free energies, the root mean square error of the SMIRNOFF99Frosst calculations relative to experiment is 0.9 [0.7, 1.1] kcal/mol, while the corresponding results for GAFF 1.7 and GAFF 2.1 are 0.9 [0.7, 1.1] kcal/mol and 1.7 [1.5, 1.9] kcal/mol, respectively, with 95% confidence ranges in brackets. These results suggest that SMIRNOFF99Frosst performs competitively with existing small molecule force fields and is a parsimonious starting point for optimization.</p></div></div></div>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document