Role of polarization in ligand docking and binding affinity prediction for inhibitors of dengue virus

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 1030-1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kshatresh Dutta Dubey ◽  
Amit Kumar Chaubey ◽  
Rajendra Prasad Ojha
Keyword(s):  
Dengue Virus ◽  
Binding Affinity ◽  
Ligand Docking ◽  
Binding Affinity Prediction ◽  
Affinity Prediction

CSCORE: A SIMPLE YET EFFECTIVE SCORING FUNCTION FOR PROTEIN–LIGAND BINDING AFFINITY PREDICTION USING MODIFIED CMAC LEARNING ARCHITECTURE

2011 ◽  
Vol 09 (supp01) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
XUCHANG OUYANG ◽  
STEPHANUS DANIEL HANDOKO ◽  
CHEE KEONG KWOH
Keyword(s):  
Binding Affinity ◽  
Scoring Function ◽  
Binding Mode ◽  
Computational Method ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Machine Learning Techniques ◽  
Ligand Docking ◽  
Scoring Functions ◽  
Binding Affinity Prediction ◽  
Affinity Prediction

Protein–ligand docking is a computational method to identify the binding mode of a ligand and a target protein, and predict the corresponding binding affinity using a scoring function. This method has great value in drug design. After decades of development, scoring functions nowadays typically can identify the true binding mode, but the prediction of binding affinity still remains a major problem. Here we present CScore, a data-driven scoring function using a modified Cerebellar Model Articulation Controller (CMAC) learning architecture, for accurate binding affinity prediction. The performance of CScore in terms of correlation between predicted and experimental binding affinities is benchmarked under different validation approaches. CScore achieves a prediction with R = 0.7668 and RMSE = 1.4540 when tested on an independent dataset. To the best of our knowledge, this result outperforms other scoring functions tested on the same dataset. The performance of CScore varies on different clusters under the leave-cluster-out validation approach, but still achieves competitive result. Lastly, the target-specified CScore achieves an even better result with R = 0.8237 and RMSE = 1.0872, trained on a much smaller but more relevant dataset for each target. The large dataset of protein–ligand complexes structural information and advances of machine learning techniques enable the data-driven approach in binding affinity prediction. CScore is capable of accurate binding affinity prediction. It is also shown that CScore will perform better if sufficient and relevant data is presented. As there is growth of publicly available structural data, further improvement of this scoring scheme can be expected.

GRAM: A True Null Model for Relative Binding Affinity Predictions

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanglei Cui ◽  
Alan P. Graves ◽  
Eric S. Manas
Keyword(s):  
Binding Affinity ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Null Model ◽  
Performance Measure ◽  
Interval Estimate ◽  
Empirical Observation ◽  
Binding Affinity Prediction ◽  
Affinity Prediction ◽  
Relative Binding Affinity ◽  
Relative Binding

Relative binding affinity prediction is a critical component in computer aided drug design. Significant amount of effort has been dedicated to developing rapid and reliable in silico methods. However, robust assessment of their performance is still a complicated issue, as it requires a performance measure applicable in the prospective setting and more importantly a true null model that defines the expected performance of random in an objective manner. Although many performance metrics, such as correlation coefficient (r2), mean unsigned error (MUE), and room mean square error (RMSE), are frequently used in the literature, a true and non-trivial null model has yet been identified. To address this problem, here we introduce an interval estimate as an additional measure, namely prediction interval (PI), which can be estimated from the error distribution of the predictions. The benefits of using the interval estimate are 1) it provides the uncertainty range in the predicted activities, which is important in prospective applications; 2) a true null model with well-defined PI can be established. We provide one such example termed Gaussian Random Affinity Model (GRAM), which is based on the empirical observation that the affinity change in a typical lead optimization effort has the tendency to distribute normally N (0, s). Having an analytically defined PI that only depends on the variation in the activities, GRAM should in principle allow us to compare the performance of relative binding affinity prediction methods in a standard way, ultimately critical to measuring the progress made in algorithm development.<br>

Improving the Accuracy of Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction by Deep Learning Models: Benchmark and Model

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Rezaei ◽  
Yanjun Li ◽  
Xiaolin Li ◽  
Chenglong Li
Keyword(s):  
Deep Learning ◽  
Drug Design ◽  
Binding Affinity ◽  
Benchmark Dataset ◽  
Rational Drug Design ◽  
Learning Models ◽  
Structure Based Drug Design ◽  
Binding Affinity Prediction ◽  
Affinity Prediction ◽  
Rational Drug

<b>Introduction:</b> The ability to discriminate among ligands binding to the same protein target in terms of their relative binding affinity lies at the heart of structure-based drug design. Any improvement in the accuracy and reliability of binding affinity prediction methods decreases the discrepancy between experimental and computational results.<br><b>Objectives:</b> The primary objectives were to find the most relevant features affecting binding affinity prediction, least use of manual feature engineering, and improving the reliability of binding affinity prediction using efficient deep learning models by tuning the model hyperparameters.<br><b>Methods:</b> The binding site of target proteins was represented as a grid box around their bound ligand. Both binary and distance-dependent occupancies were examined for how an atom affects its neighbor voxels in this grid. A combination of different features including ANOLEA, ligand elements, and Arpeggio atom types were used to represent the input. An efficient convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture, DeepAtom, was developed, trained and tested on the PDBbind v2016 dataset. Additionally an extended benchmark dataset was compiled to train and evaluate the models.<br><b>Results: </b>The best DeepAtom model showed an improved accuracy in the binding affinity prediction on PDBbind core subset (Pearson’s R=0.83) and is better than the recent state-of-the-art models in this field. In addition when the DeepAtom model was trained on our proposed benchmark dataset, it yields higher correlation compared to the baseline which confirms the value of our model.<br><b>Conclusions:</b> The promising results for the predicted binding affinities is expected to pave the way for embedding deep learning models in virtual screening and rational drug design fields.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document