4.5 Article

Computational evaluation of protein-small molecule binding

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages 56-61

Publisher

CURRENT BIOLOGY LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.sbi.2008.11.009

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA120215, CA120215, CA107331, R01 CA107331, F32CA1197712] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL082670, R21 HL082670] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM070855, R01 GM072558, R29 GM051501, R01 GM051501-12, R01 GM051501, R01 GM070855-04, R01 GM072558-05, GM51501] Funding Source: Medline
  4. CDMRP [542406, CA120215] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Determining protein-small molecule binding affinity is a key component of present-day rational drug discovery. To circumvent the time, labor, and materials costs associated with experimental protein-small molecule binding assays, a variety of structure-based computational methods have been developed for determining protein-small molecule binding affinities. These methods can be placed in one of two classes: accurate but slow (Class 1), and fast but approximate (Class 2). Class 1 methods, which explicitly take into account protein flexibility and include an atomic-level description of solvation, are capable of quantitatively reproducing experimental protein-small molecule absolute binding free energies. However, Class 1 computational requirements make screening thousands to millions of small molecules against a protein, as required for rational drug design, infeasible for the foreseeable future. Class 2 methods, on the contrary, are sufficiently fast to perform such inhibitor screening, yet they suffer from limited descriptions of protein flexibility and solvation, which in turn limit their ability to select and rank-order small molecules by computed binding affinities. This review presents an overview of Class 1 and Class 2 methods, and avenues of research in Class 2 methods aimed at bringing them closer to Class 1 accuracy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available