Abstract:The computer-aided drug design field is constituted by a wide range of different approaches that can be roughly classified as either ligand- or receptor-based techniques. In order to design and develop new active ligands, ligand-based approaches use the information derived from the properties of ligands with known activity against the target of interest, whereas the receptor-based techniques use the information obtained from the knowledge of the three-dimensional structure of the target and from the analysis of ligand–receptor interactions. With regards to the receptor-based techniques, one of the key steps of almost all approaches is represented by the estimation of the binding strength between the ligand and the receptor. Indeed, a proper evaluation of this interaction can be profitably used to design new ligands characterized by a tighter binding with the target of interest. Unfortunately, the main limitation of docking calculation resides in the estimation of the ligand–receptor interaction, which is usually evaluated through simple scoring functions. In particular, the scoring functions are used for both qualitative and quantitative studies: they are used for ranking different binding poses of the same ligand, thus providing its most reliable binding orientation, and they can also be used for comparing from an energetical point of view the interaction of different ligands with the same receptor, thus ranking the ligands according to the relative binding affinities. Although the available scoring functions are able to suggest the most reliable binding orientation for a ligand, their ability to predict ligand-receptor binding affinity and correctly rank different ligands on this basis is often not satisfactory enough. Among the different approaches that can be applied to evaluate the ligand–receptor interaction, the accurate measurement of binding free energy plays a very important role and, in this field, the most rigorous theoretical method is represented by free-energy perturbation (FEP), which estimates the difference in free energy between two states by slowly changing one state to another through a number of nonphysical intermediate states, performing extended sampling at each intermediate state [<a href="#">1</a>]. Unfortunately, this method is extremely time consuming and therefore more approximate methods have been developed. In this context, the molecular mechanics Poisson–Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA) and molecular mechanics generalized Born surface area (MM/GBSA) developed by Kollman et al. [<a href="#">2</a>,<a href="#">3</a>] are among the most commonly used methods.

Plaque-removal efficacy of four types of dental floss.

Pbsa_e: A Pbsa-Based Free Energy Estimator for Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity

What is the current value of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods in drug discovery?

Assessing the Performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA Methods. 1. The Accuracy of Binding Free Energy Calculations Based on Molecular Dynamics Simulations

Prediction of protein–ligand binding affinity by free energy simulations: assumptions, pitfalls and expectations

MM/PB(GB)SA benchmarks on soluble proteins and membrane proteins

Improving the Performance of Screening MM/PBSA in Protein-Ligand Interactions via Machine Learning

Evaluating the performance of MM/PBSA for binding affinity prediction using class A GPCR crystal structures

Rapid and Reliable Binding Affinity Prediction of Bromodomain Inhibitors: A Computational Study

The Association between Depressive Symptoms and Cigarette Smoking in An Urban Primary Care Sample

End-Point Binding Free Energy Calculation with MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA: Strategies and Applications in Drug Design

Nonbonded Force Field Parameters from MBIS Partitioning of the Molecular Electron Density Improve Binding Affinity Predictions of the T4-Lysozyme Double Mutant

Evidence for the existence of specific cannabinoid binding sites.

Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 9. Prediction reliability of binding affinities and binding poses for protein-peptide complexes

Non-bonded force field parameters from MBIS partitioning of the molecular electron density improve binding affinity predictions of the T4-lysozyme double mutant

Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 10. Prediction reliability of binding affinities and binding poses for RNA-ligand complexes

Binding Free Energy Calculation Based on the Fragment Molecular Orbital Method and Its Application in Designing Novel SHP-2 Allosteric Inhibitors

Estimating the Roles of Protonation and Electronic Polarization in Absolute Binding Affinity Simulations

Manganese in the U.S. gasoline supply.

Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 6. Capability to predict protein-protein binding free energies and re-rank binding poses generated by protein-protein docking.

In silico binding affinity prediction for metabotropic glutamate receptors using both endpoint free energy methods and a machine learning-based scoring function