Lee Juyong, Tofoleanu Florentina, Pickard Frank C, König Gerhard, Huang Jing, Damjanović Ana, Baek Minkyung, Seok Chaok, Brooks Bernard R
Laboratory of Computational Biology, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20852, USA.
Department of Pharmaceutical Science, School of Pharmacy, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, 20852, USA.
J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2017 Jan;31(1):71-85. doi: 10.1007/s10822-016-9968-2. Epub 2016 Sep 27.
Herein, we report the absolute binding free energy calculations of CBClip complexes in the SAMPL5 blind challenge. Initial conformations of CBClip complexes were obtained using docking and molecular dynamics simulations. Free energy calculations were performed using thermodynamic integration (TI) with soft-core potentials and Bennett's acceptance ratio (BAR) method based on a serial insertion scheme. We compared the results obtained with TI simulations with soft-core potentials and Hamiltonian replica exchange simulations with the serial insertion method combined with the BAR method. The results show that the difference between the two methods can be mainly attributed to the van der Waals free energies, suggesting that either the simulations used for TI or the simulations used for BAR, or both are not fully converged and the two sets of simulations may have sampled difference phase space regions. The penalty scores of force field parameters of the 10 guest molecules provided by CHARMM Generalized Force Field can be an indicator of the accuracy of binding free energy calculations. Among our submissions, the combination of docking and TI performed best, which yielded the root mean square deviation of 2.94 kcal/mol and an average unsigned error of 3.41 kcal/mol for the ten guest molecules. These values were best overall among all participants. However, our submissions had little correlation with experiments.
在此,我们报告了在SAMPL5盲测挑战中CBClip复合物的绝对结合自由能计算。CBClip复合物的初始构象通过对接和分子动力学模拟获得。自由能计算使用基于串行插入方案的带有软核势的热力学积分(TI)和贝内特接受率(BAR)方法进行。我们将使用软核势的TI模拟结果与结合串行插入方法和BAR方法的哈密顿量副本交换模拟结果进行了比较。结果表明,两种方法之间的差异主要可归因于范德华自由能,这表明用于TI的模拟或用于BAR的模拟,或两者都未完全收敛,并且这两组模拟可能采样了不同的相空间区域。CHARMM通用力场提供的10种客体分子的力场参数惩罚分数可以作为结合自由能计算准确性的一个指标。在我们提交的结果中,对接和TI的组合表现最佳,对于这10种客体分子,其均方根偏差为2.94千卡/摩尔,平均绝对误差为3.41千卡/摩尔。在所有参与者中,这些值总体上是最好的。然而,我们提交的结果与实验几乎没有相关性。