Abstract
Understanding molecular recognition is one major requirement for drug discovery and design. Physicochemical and shape complementarity between two binding partners is the driving force during complex formation. In this study, the impact of shape within this process is analyzed. Protein binding pockets and co-crystallized ligands are represented by normalized principal moments of inertia ratios (NPRs). The corresponding descriptor space is triangular, with its corners occupied by spherical, discoid, and elongated shapes. An analysis of a selected set of sc-PDB complexes suggests that pockets and bound ligands avoid spherical shapes, which are, however, prevalent in small unoccupied pockets. Furthermore, a direct shape comparison confirms previous studies that on average only one third of a pocket is filled by its bound ligand, supplemented by a 50 % subpocket coverage. In this study, we found that shape complementary is expressed by low pairwise shape distances in NPR space, short distances between the centers-of-mass, and small deviations in the angle between the first principal ellipsoid axes. Furthermore, it is assessed how different binding pocket parameters are related to bioactivity and binding efficiency of the co-crystallized ligand. In addition, the performance of different shape and size parameters of pockets and ligands is evaluated in a virtual screening scenario performed on four representative targets.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Náray-Szabó GG (1993) J Mol Recognit 6(4):205
Jennings A (2011) In: Tari LW (ed) Structure-based drug discovery methods in molecular biology. Springer Protocols, Human Press, pp 235–250
Chen K, Kurgan L (2009) PLoS ONE 4(2):e4473
Kahraman A, Morris RJ, Laskowski RA, Thornton JM (2007) J Mol Biol 368(1):283
Kahraman A, Morris RJ, Laskowski RA, Favia AD, Thornton JM (2010) Proteins 78(5):1120
Nicholls A, McGaughey G, Sheridan R, Good A, Warren G, Mathieu M, Muchmore S, Brown S, Grant J, Haigh J, Nevins N, Jain A, Kelley B (2010) J Med Chem 53(10):3862
Morris R, Najmanovich R, Kahraman A, Thornton J (2005) Bioinformatics. Oxford, England. 21(10):2347
Putta S, Beroza P (2007) Curr Top Med Chem 7(15):1514
McGaughey G, Sheridan R, Bayly C, Culberson J, Kreatsoulas C, Lindsley S, Maiorov V, Truchon JF, Cornell W (2007) J Chem Inf Model 47(4):1504
Kortagere S, Krasowski M, Ekins S (2009) Trends Pharmacol Sci 30(3):138
Rush T, Grant J, Mosyak L, Nicholls A (2005) J Med Chem 48(5):1489
Miller MD, Sheridan RP, Kearsley SK (1999) J Med Chem 42(9):1505
Ballester P, Richards W (2007) J Comput Chem 28(10):1711
Sauer W, Schwarz M (2003) J Chem Inf Comput Sci 43(3):987
Akritopoulou-Zanze I, Metz J, Djuric S (2007) Drug Discov Today 12(21–22):948
Wirth M, Sauer W (2011) Mol Inf 30:677
Liang J, Edelsbrunner H, Woodward C (1998) Protein Sci Publ Protein Soc 7(9):1884
Sonavane S, Chakrabarti P (2008) PLoS Comput Biol 4(9):e1000188
Weisel M, Kriegl JM, Schneider G (2010) ChemBioChem 11(4):1
Pérot S, Sperandio O, Miteva M, Camproux AC, Villoutreix B (2010) Drug Discov Today 15(15–16):656
Meslamani J, Rognan D, Kellenberger E (2011) Bioinformatics 27(9):1324
Volkamer A, Griewel A, Grombacher T, Rarey M (2010) J Chem Inf Model 50(11):2041
Volkamer A, Kuhn D, Grombacher T, Rippmann F, Rarey M (2012) J Chem Inf Model 52(2):360
Berman H, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat T, Weissig H, Shindyalov I, Bourne P (2000) Nucleic Acids Res 28(1):235
Halgren T (1996) J Comput Chem 17(5–6):490
Blow DM (2002) Acta Crystallographica Section D 58(5):792
Vainio MJ, Puranen JS, Johnson MS (2009) J Chem Inf Model 49(2):492
Wang R, Fang X, Lu Y, Wang S (2004) J Med Chem 47(12):2977
Gaulton A, Bellis LJ, Bento AP, Chambers J, Davies M, Hersey A, Light Y, McGlinchey S, Michalovich D, Al-Lazikani B, Overington JP (2011) Nucleic Acids Res 40(D1):D1100
Hawkins PCD, Skillman AG, Warren GL, Ellingson BA, Stahl MT (2010) J Chem Inf Model 50(4):572
Friesner RA, Banks JL, Murphy RB, Halgren TA, Klicic JJ, Mainz DT, Repasky MP, Knoll EH, Shelley M, Perry JK, Shaw DE, Francis P, Shenkin PS (2004) J Med Chem 47(7):1739
Madhavi Sastry G, Adzhigirey M, Day T, Annabhimoju R, Sherman W (2013) J Comput-Aided Mol Des 27(3):221
Kuntz ID, Chen K, Sharp KA, Kollman PA (1999) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96(18):9997
Reynolds CH, Tounge BA, Bembenek SD (2008) J Med Chem 51(8):2432
Abad-Zapatero C, Perisic O, Wass J, Bento AP, Overington J, Al-Lazikani B, Johnson ME (2010) Drug Discov Today 15(19–20):804
Huang N, Shoichet BK, Irwin JJ (2006) J Med Chem 49(23):6789
Cross J, Thompson D, Rai B, Baber J, Fan K, Hu Y, Humblet C (2009) J Chem Inf Model 49(6):1455
Verdonk ML, Berdini V, Hartshorn MJ, Mooij WTM, Murray CW, Taylor RD, Watson P (2004) J Chem Inf Comput Sci 44(3):793
Acknowledgments
We thank Volker Hähnke and Serge Christmann-Franck for constructive discussions and Jeffrey Shaw for performing the Glide docking runs. Andrea Volkamer acknowledges funding from the BMBF (Grant 0315292A) for the pocket analysis project as part of the Biokatalyse2021 cluster. Matthias Wirth thanks Merck Serono S.A. for a PhD fellowship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Matthias Wirth and Andrea Volkamer contributed equally to this manuscript.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wirth, M., Volkamer, A., Zoete, V. et al. Protein pocket and ligand shape comparison and its application in virtual screening. J Comput Aided Mol Des 27, 511–524 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-013-9659-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-013-9659-1