Abstract:The computational prediction of relative binding free energies is a crucial goal for drug discovery, and G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are arguably the most important drug target class. However, they present increased complexity to model compared to soluble globular proteins. Despite breakthroughs, experimental X-ray crystal and cryo-EM structures are challenging to attain, meaning computational models of the receptor and ligand binding mode are sometimes necessary. This leads to uncertainty in understanding ligand–protein binding induced changes such as, water positioning and displacement, side chain positioning, hydrogen bond networks, and the overall structure of the hydration shell around the ligand and protein. In other words, the very elements that define structure activity relationships (SARs) and are crucial for accurate binding free energy calculations are typically more uncertain for GPCRs. In this work we use free energy perturbation (FEP) to predict the relative binding free energies for ligands of two different GPCRs. We pinpoint the key aspects for success such as the important role of key water molecules, amino acid ionization states, and the benefit of equilibration with specific ligands. Initial calculations following typical FEP setup and execution protocols delivered no correlation with experiment, but we show how results are improved in a logical and systematic way. This approach gave, in the best cases, a coefficient of determination (<i>R</i><sup>2</sup>) compared with experiment in the range of 0.6–0.9 and mean unsigned errors compared to experiment of 0.6–0.7 kcal/mol. We anticipate that our findings will be applicable to other difficult-to-model protein ligand data sets and be of wide interest for the community to continue improving FE binding energy predictions.The Supporting Information is available free of charge at <a class="ext-link" href="/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00449?goto=supporting-info">https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00449</a>.Correlation of calculated and experimental activities for additional studies and the calculated free energy differences for specific perturbation networks (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00449/suppl_file/ci0c00449_si_001.pdf">PDF</a>)Input PDB and ligand structures (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00449/suppl_file/ci0c00449_si_002.zip">ZIP</a>)This article has not yet been cited by other publications.

Locating large flexible ligands on proteins

Computing Ligand Binding Free Energy in a Large Flexible Pocket of a Large Protein

Protein flexibility upon ligand binding: Docking predictions and statistical analysis

Predicting binding events in very flexible, allosteric, multi-domain proteins

Large-Scale Ligand Perturbations of the Protein Conformational Landscape Reveal State-Specific Interaction Hotspots

Identifying ligand binding sites and poses using GPU-accelerated Hamiltonian replica exchange molecular dynamics

Estimation of ligand binding free energy using multi-eGO.

FlexVDW: A machine learning approach to account for protein flexibility in ligand docking

Alchemical Grid Dock (AlGDock): Binding Free Energy Calculations between Flexible Ligands and Rigid Receptors

On Evaluating Molecular-Docking Methods for Pose Prediction and Enrichment Factors

AutoDockFR: Advances in Protein-Ligand Docking with Explicitly Specified Binding Site Flexibility

A hierarchical method for generating low‐energy conformers of a protein‐ligand complex

Deep Learning Model for Efficient Protein–Ligand Docking with Implicit Side-Chain Flexibility

Accurate Prediction of GPCR Ligand Binding Affinity with Free Energy Perturbation

Expanding Automated Multiconformer Ligand Modeling to Macrocycles and Fragments

On achieving high accuracy and reliability in the calculation of relative protein–ligand binding affinities

Grid-based state space exploration for molecular binding

Prediction of large conformational changes of a protein binding pocket associated with ligand binding

Multiple ligand docking by Glide: implications for virtual second-site screening

Leveraging nonstructural data to predict structures and affinities of protein-ligand complexes

Docking Challenge: Protein Sampling and Molecular Docking Performance