Abstract
Abstract A thorough evaluation of some of the most advanced docking and scoring methods currently available is described, and guidelines for the choice of an appropriate protocol for docking and virtual screening are defined. The generation of a large and highly curated test set of pharmaceutically relevant protein–ligand complexes with known binding affinities is described, and three highly regarded docking programs (Glide, GOLD, and ICM) are evaluated on the same set with respect to their ability to reproduce crystallographic binding orientations. Glide correctly identified the crystallographic pose within 2.0 Å in 61% of the cases, versus 48% for GOLD and 45% for ICM. In general Glide appears to perform most consistently with respect to diversity of binding sites and ligand flexibility, while the performance of ICM and GOLD is more binding site–dependent and it is significantly poorer when binding is predominantly driven by hydrophobic interactions. The results also show that energy minimization and reranking of the top N poses can be an effective means to overcome some of the limitations of a given docking function. The same docking programs are evaluated in conjunction with three different scoring functions for their ability to discriminate actives from inactives in virtual screening. The evaluation, performed on three different systems (HIV‐1 protease, IMPDH, and p38 MAP kinase), confirms that the relative performance of different docking and scoring methods is to some extent binding site–dependent. GlideScore appears to be an effective scoring function for database screening, with consistent performance across several types of binding sites, while ChemScore appears to be most useful in sterically demanding sites since it is more forgiving of repulsive interactions. Energy minimization of docked poses can significantly improve the enrichments in systems with sterically demanding binding sites. Overall Glide appears to be a safe general choice for docking, while the choice of the best scoring tool remains to a larger extent system‐dependent and should be evaluated on a case‐by‐case basis. Proteins 2004. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Keywords
Docking (animal)Virtual screeningBinding affinitiesComputational biologyProtein–ligand dockingComputer scienceSearching the conformational space for dockingBinding siteChemistryDrug discoveryBiologyBiochemistryMedicineReceptor
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
An Evaluation of Explicit Receptor Flexibility in Molecular Docking Using Molecular Dynamics and Torsion Angle Molecular Dynamics
Incorporating receptor flexibility into molecular docking should improve results for flexible proteins. However, the incorporation of explicit all-atom flexibility with molecula...
A general approach for developing system‐specific functions to score protein–ligand docked complexes using support vector inductive logic programming
Abstract Despite the increased recent use of protein–ligand and protein–protein docking in the drug discovery process due to the increases in computational power, the difficulty...
A method for localizing ligand binding pockets in protein structures
Abstract The accurate identification of ligand binding sites in protein structures can be valuable in determining protein function. Once the binding site is known, it becomes ea...
Identification of a Second Region Upstream of the Mouse Heme Oxygenase-1 Gene That Functions as a Basal Level and Inducer-dependent Transcription Enhancer
A 161-base pair fragment (AB1) approximately 10 kilobase pairs upstream of the transcription start site of the mouse heme oxygenase-1 gene functions as a basal level and inducer...
Fast procedure for reconstruction of full‐atom protein models from reduced representations
Abstract We introduce PULCHRA, a fast and robust method for the reconstruction of full‐atom protein models starting from a reduced protein representation. The algorithm is parti...
Publication Info
- Year
- 2004
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 235-249
- Citations
- 445
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Altmetric
PlumX Metrics
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
445
OpenAlex
Cite This
Emanuele Perola,
W. Patrick Walters,
Paul S. Charifson
(2004).
A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance.
Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics
, 56
(2)
, 235-249.
https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.20088
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1002/prot.20088