Abstract:Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) are attractive targets for drug design because of their essential role in numerous cellular processes and disease pathways. However, in general, PPIs display exposed binding pockets at the interface, and as such, have been largely unexploited for therapeutic interventions with low-molecular weight compounds. Here, we used docking and various rescoring strategies in an attempt to recover PPI inhibitors from a set of active and inactive molecules for 11 targets collected in ChEMBL and PubChem. Our focus is on the screening power of the various developed protocols and on using fast approaches so as to be able to apply such a strategy to the screening of ultralarge libraries in the future. First, we docked compounds into each target using the fast "pscreen" mode of the structure-based virtual screening (VS) package Surflex. Subsequently, the docking poses were postprocessed to derive a set of 3D topological descriptors: (i) shape similarity and (ii) interaction fingerprint similarity with a co-crystallized inhibitor, (iii) solvent-accessible surface area, and (iv) extent of deviation from the geometric center of a reference inhibitor. The derivatized descriptors, together with descriptor-scaled scoring functions, were utilized to investigate possible impacts on VS performance metrics. Moreover, four standalone scoring functions, RF-Score-VS (machine-learning), DLIGAND2 (knowledge-based), Vinardo (empirical), and X-SCORE (empirical), were employed to rescore the PPI compounds. Collectively, the results indicate that the topological scoring algorithms could be valuable both at a global level, with up to 79% increase in areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for some targets, and in early stages, with up to a 4-fold increase in enrichment factors at 1% of the screened collections. Outstandingly, DLIGAND2 emerged as the best scoring function on this data set, outperforming all rescoring techniques in terms of VS metrics. The described methodology could help in the rational design of small-molecule PPI inhibitors and has direct applications in many therapeutic areas, including cancer, CNS, and infectious diseases such as COVID-19.The Supporting Information is available free of charge at <a class="ext-link" href="/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00545?goto=supporting-info">https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00545</a>.List of all the PDB entries of the protein–ligand complexes of the selected PPI targets, binding site properties of the selected protein structures, adjusted log AUC values, BEDROC values, enrichment factor values at 1 and 5% subsetting, percent of improvement in the AUC values, <i>p</i>-values obtained from comparison of the AUC and the log AUC values between Surflex and the different rescoring methods, Kendall τ correlation coefficient between the AUC values obtained using different scoring methods and the binding site properties of the PPI target proteins, AUC values for the data sets screened using DLIGAND2 and X-SCORE for the best-ranked poses according to the docking score and the best poses obtained from the rescoring of all poses, Pearson correlation coefficient between MW and Surflex-dock score, MW versus rSASA, regression coefficient between MW and Surflex-dock score, MW versus rSASA, network map illustrating the functional diversity of the PPI sites used in this study, KNIME workflow for binding site diversity analysis, comparison of the Cα RMSD-normalized distributions of the target proteins, PCA score plots of the PPI data sets, box plots showing the distribution of physicochemical properties of the actives and the inactives of the PPI data sets, linear ROC and semilogarithmic ROC curves for the docking of actives and inactives to the target proteins, Tanimoto similarity values of the actives and inactives with the reference PPI inhibitors, enrichment factor plots, performance strength of different scoring methods, PCA score plot of the PPI targets, and supporting methods (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00545/suppl_file/ci0c00545_si_001.pdf">PDF</a>)This article has not yet been cited by other publications.

Can an Optimization/scoring Procedure in Ligand–protein Docking Be Employed to Probe Drug-Resistant Mutations in Proteins?

The Interprotein Scoring Noises in Glide Docking Scores

Why is Substrate Peptide Binding Unsusceptible to Multidrug-Resistant Mutations in HIV-1 Protease? A Structural and Energetic Analysis

Some Insights into Mechanism for Binding and Drug Resistance of Wild Type and I50V V82A and I84V Mutations in HIV-1 Protease with GRL-98065 Inhibitor from Molecular Dynamic Simulations.

Prediction of HIV-1 Protease Inhibitor Resistance using a Protein–Inhibitor Flexible Docking Approach

Docking Challenge: Protein Sampling and Molecular Docking Performance

DOX: A New Computational Protocol for Accurate Prediction of the Protein-Ligand Binding Structures.

Reliable Prediction of the Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Using a Charge Penetration Corrected AMOEBA Force Field: A Case Study of Drug Resistance Mutations in Abl Kinase.

Insights into the Molecular Mechanisms of Protein-Ligand Interactions by Molecular Docking and Molecular Dynamics Simulation: A Case of Oligopeptide Binding Protein

Virtual Ligand Screening against Escherichia coli Dihydrofolate Reductase: Improving Docking Enrichment Using Physics-Based Methods

Prediction of Potential Toxicity and Side Effect Protein Targets of a Small Molecule by a Ligand–protein Inverse Docking Approach

Ligand-protein Inverse Docking and Its Potential Use in the Computer Search of Protein Targets of a Small Molecule

Structural modeling of HCV NS3/4A serine protease drug-resistance mutations using end-point continuum solvation and side-chain flexibility calculations

Comparison of Ligand-, Target Structure-, and Protein-Ligand Interaction Fingerprint-based Virtual Screening Methods

Predicting Drug Resistance of the HIV‐1 Protease Using Molecular Interaction Energy Components

Fast Rescoring Protocols to Improve the Performance of Structure-Based Virtual Screening Performed on Protein–Protein Interfaces

Docking Peptides into HIV/FIV Protease with Deep Learning and Focused Peptide Docking Methods

Comprehensive evaluation of ten docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes: the prediction accuracy of sampling power and scoring power.

Computational studies of protein–drug binding affinity changes upon mutations in the drug target

Using Hierarchical Virtual Screening To Combat Drug Resistance Of The Hiv-1 Protease

Compromise in Docking Power of Liganded Crystal Structures of M pro SARS-CoV-2 Surpasses 90% Success Rate