* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Lect 10:Computer aided drug design: structure-based
Survey
Document related concepts
Biochemistry wikipedia , lookup
Paracrine signalling wikipedia , lookup
Metalloprotein wikipedia , lookup
G protein–coupled receptor wikipedia , lookup
Ligand binding assay wikipedia , lookup
Signal transduction wikipedia , lookup
Homology modeling wikipedia , lookup
Protein purification wikipedia , lookup
Western blot wikipedia , lookup
Interactome wikipedia , lookup
Protein structure prediction wikipedia , lookup
Two-hybrid screening wikipedia , lookup
Proteolysis wikipedia , lookup
Clinical neurochemistry wikipedia , lookup
Protein–protein interaction wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
SMA5422: Special Topics in Biotechnology Lecture 10: Computer aided drug design: structure-based approach. Chen Yu Zong Department of Computational Science National University of Singapore Drug design overview. Introduction of methodology. Examples: drug resistance, toxicity prediction. Traditional Drug Design Methods: Random screening Long design cycle: 7-12 years. High cost: $350 million USD per marketed drug. Drug Discovery Today 2, 72-78 (1997) Too slow and costly to meet demand. Strategies for improving design cycle: Smart screening: • High-throughput robotic screening. Diversity of chemical compounds: • Combinatorial chemistry. Nature 384 Suppl., 2-7 (1996) High expectation. Alternative approach? Current situation: • Molecular mechanism of disease processes, structural biology. • Rising cost of experimental equipment and resources. • Computer revolution (low cost, high power). • Software development. Computer approach? Strategies for improving design cycle: Computer-aided drug design: • Receptor 3D structure unknown: • QSAR. Pharm. Res. 10, 475-486 (1993). • Receptor 3D structure known: • Ligand-protein docking. Science 257, 1078-1082 (1992) Is ligand-protein docking practical? 3D structure of proteins and small molecules: • 15,000 protein entries in PDB, growth rate: ~100-200 per month. • 250,000 small molecules in ACD. Computation time: • 100,000 small molecules per week. Nature 384 Suppl., 23-26 (1996) Computer cost: • Decreasing dramatically. Success Stories: HIV-1 Protease Inhibitors: • • • • Inverase (Hoffman-LaRoche, 1995) Norvir (Abbot, 1996) Crixivan (Merck, 1996) Viracept (Agouron, 1997) Drug discovery today 2, 261-272 (1997) Examples of Other Drugs Designed by Structure-Based Methods: Human renin inhibitor Antihypertension. Collagenase and stromelysin inhibitor Anticancer and antiarthritis. Purine nucleotide phosphorylase inhibitor Antidepressant. Thymidylate synthase inhibitor Antiproliferation. Nature 384 suppl, 23-26 (1996) Favourable Conditions for Application of Ligand-Protein Docking Human Genome Project Protein Crystallography Functional Genomics Ligand-Protein Docking Pharmacogenomics Molecular Biology Modeling Technology Information Technology Computer-aided drug design in Industry and Premier Universities Pharmaceutical Giants: • Merck, Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Glaxo-Welcome. Biotech New and Emerging Stars: • Agouron, Arris, Chiron, ISIS, MetaXen, Vertex. Major Universities: • Harvard, UCSF, UC Berkeley, Washington U, Cambridge, Columbia. Computer-aided drug design in Industry Structure-based design viewed as having competitive edge: • An indication: Companies are withholding 3D structures of key proteins. Modeling group viewed as a key component in drug discovery team: • Many companies have setup modeling group. Investment in computer equipment: • An indication: Glaxo-welcome bought 100 SGI workstations in 1996. Ligand-Protein Docking is the Most Rational Approach: Reason: Based on receptor structure Mechanism of drug action: Mechanism of drug action: Mechanism of drug binding: Ligand binding mechanism . . . . Scoring Functions in Ligand-Protein Docking Potential Energy Description: Scoring Functions in Ligand-Protein Docking Potential Energy Description: Scoring Functions in Ligand-Protein Docking Potential Energy Description: • van der Waals interactions • Electrostatic interactions V = ligand atoms [ Aij1/2 Arec- Bij1/2 Brec+ qiQrec ] Modelling Strategy for Ligand-Protein Docking Rceptor Cavity Model Ligand-Protein Docking Algorithm Utilization of geometric features Docking Evaluation (Chemical Complementarity) Local energy minimisation to release bad contacts More realistic potential functions Average CPU time: 5,000 small molecules per week The Use of Molecular Mechanics Energy Functions in Docking Evaluation Potential Energy Description: • • • • Hydrogen bonding van der Waals interactions Electrostatic interactions Empirical solvation free energy (energy evaluation only) V = H bonds [ V0 (1-e-a(r-r0) )2 - V0 ] + non bonded [ Aij/rij12 - Bij/rij6 + qiqj /r rij] + atoms i Dsi Ai Example 1: Study of Drug Resistant Mutations by Ligand-Protein Docking Enzyme-inhibitor PDB Id Mutation introduced HIV-1 protease + MK 639 1HSG HIV-1 protease + Saquinavir HIV-1 protease + SB 203386 HIV-1 protease + VX 478 HIV-1 protease + U89360e 1HXB 1SBG 1HPV 1GNO V82A, V82F, V82I, I84V, V82f/I84V, M46I/L63P, V82T/I84V, M46I/L63P/V82T/I84V V82F, V82I, I84V, G48V, V82F/I84V, V82T/I84V I32V/V47I/I82V M46I/L63P, V82T/I84V, M46I/L63P/V82T/I84V V82D, V82N, V82Q, D30F HIV-1 RT + Nevirapine HIV-1 RT + TIBO R82913 1VRT 1TVR L100I, K103N, V106A, E138K, Y181C, Y188H L100I, K103N, V106A, E138K, Y181C, Y188H J. Mol. Graph. Mod. 19, 560-570 (2001). Quality of Modelled Structures Wild type X-ray structure: Blue Modelled mutant: Red Mutant X-ray structure: Green Mutation induced energy change compared with observed drug resistance data J. Bio. Chem.271, 31947 (1996) AIDS 12: 453 (1998) Biochemistry 37, 8735 (1998) Modelling Strategy for Ligand-Protein Induced Fit: Generation of multiple conformations Identification of key rotatable bonds constructive to conformation change Algorithm for collective rotation of backbone bonds Geometric constraint that mimics chain restoring forces Adjustment of side chain orientation minimisation of side chain packing along pathway Energy barrier along pathway Based on molecular mechanics energy functions and force fields Example 2: Prediction of toxicity, side effect, pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics by a receptor-based approach Annu. Rev. Pharmacol Toxicol 2000, 40:353-388 1997, 37:269-296 Importance of prediction of side effect, toxicity, pharmacokinetics in early stages of drug discovery Drug Candidates in Different Stages of Development Majority of Candidates Fail to Reach Market Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1991; 50:471 Most drug candidates fail to reach market Pharmacokinetics (60%), side-effect and toxicity (40%) are the main reason. Large portion of money (USD$350 million) and time (6-12 years) spent on a clinical drug has been wasted on failed drugs. Drug Discov Today 1997; 2:72 Strategy Existing Methods: New Method: Given a Protein, Find Potential Binding Ligands From a Chemical Database Given a Ligand, Find Potential Protein Targets From a Protein Database Compound Database Protein Database Compound 1 ... Compound n Protein 1 ... Protein n Protein Ligand Successfully Docked Compounds as Putative Ligands Successfully Docked Proteins as Putative Targets Science 1992;257: 1078 Proteins 2001;43:217 Feasibility Proteins Database: >14,400 3D structures in PDB. Protein diversity: 17% in PDB with unique sequence. Advance in structural genomics: 10,000 unique proteins within 5 years. Ann. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 1996; 25:113 Nature Struct. Biol. 1998; 5:1029 Method Ligand-protein docking docking algorithms capable of finding binding conformations. Proteins. 1999; 36:1 Proteins 2001; 43:217 Additional information Rapid accumulation of knowledge in proteomics, pathways, protein functions. Computer resources Increasing power and decreasing cost (Linux PC, Multi-processor machines) Automated Protein Targets Identification Software INVDOCK Ligand \|/ Automated Process to inversely dock the Lignad to each entry in a Built-In Biomolecular Cavity Database (10,000 Protein and Nucleic Acid Entries) \|/ Step 1: Vector-based docking of a ligand to a cavity Step 2: Limited conformation optimization on the ligand and side chain of biomolecule Step 3: Energy minimization for all atom in the binding site Step 4: Docking evaluation by molecular mechanics energy functions and comparison with other ligands Successfully Docked Proteins and Nucleic Acids as Potential Targets of a Ligand | \|/ Potential Applications: \|/ Protein function, Proteomics, Ligand transport, Metabolism Therapeutic Targets, Side-Effects, Toxicity Pharmacokinetics (ADME) INVDOCK Testing on Toxicity Targets Compound Number of experimentally confirmed or implicated toxicity targets Number of toxicity targets predicted by INVDOCK Number of toxicity targets missed by INVDOCK 2 Number of toxicity targets without 3D structure or involving covalent bond 4 Number of INVDOCK predicted toxicity targets without experimental finding 2 Aspirin 15 9 Gentamici n 17 5 2 10 2 Ibuprofen 5 3 0 2 2 Indinavir 6 4 0 2 2 Neomycin 14 7 1 6 6 Penicillin G 7 6 0 1 8 Tamoxifen 2 2 0 0 4 Vitamin C 2 2 0 0 3 Total 68 38 5 25 29 J. Mol. Graph. Mod., 20, 199-218 (2001). Toxicity and side effect targets of Aspirin identified from INVDOCK search of protein database PDB Protein 1a42 Carbonic anhydrase II 1a6a HLA-DR3 1a7c Plasminogen activator inhibitor 1d6n Hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase 1hdy Alcohol dehydrogenase Experimental Finding Target Status Toxicity/Side Effect Ref Activate enzyme activity that may lead to increase in plasma bicarbonate Change in concentration. HLA level Implicated Metabolic alkalosis (hypoventilation). Puscas I Implicated Aspirin-induced asthma Dekker JW Tissuedependent response of protein. Implicated Hypertension, thrombolysis Smokoviti sA Excess uric acid in serum* Inhibition of activity Confirmed Increased blood alcohol level Gentry RT J. Mol. Graph. Mod., 20, 199-218 (2001). Conclusion: Structure-based computer aided drug design is a promising approach. Revolution in molecular biology and computer technology sets the stage for this approach. Much remains to be done.