Supplementary Material

Similar documents
Computational chemical biology to address non-traditional drug targets. John Karanicolas

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

MM-GBSA for Calculating Binding Affinity A rank-ordering study for the lead optimization of Fxa and COX-2 inhibitors

Supplementary Figures

Six Biophysical Screening Methods Miss a Large Proportion of Crystallographically Discovered Fragment Hits: A Case Study

The structure of vanadium nitrogenase reveals an unusual bridging ligand

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary Information

The structure of a nucleolytic ribozyme that employs a catalytic metal ion. Yijin Liu, Timothy J. Wilson and David M.J. Lilley

The structure of a nucleolytic ribozyme that employs a catalytic metal ion Liu, Yijin; Wilson, Timothy; Lilley, David

Dr. Sander B. Nabuurs. Computational Drug Discovery group Center for Molecular and Biomolecular Informatics Radboud University Medical Centre

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. doi: /nature07461

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Mechanistic insight into inhibition of two-component system signaling

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Different conformations of the drugs within the virtual library of FDA approved drugs will be generated.

Supporting Information

Supporting Information. UV-induced ligand exchange in MHC class I protein crystals

Supporting Information

Retrieving hits through in silico screening and expert assessment M. N. Drwal a,b and R. Griffith a

CH 3 CH 2 OH +H 2 O CHO. 2e + 2H + + O 2 H 2 O +HCOOH

Diphthamide biosynthesis requires a radical iron-sulfur enzyme. Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA

Chemical properties that affect binding of enzyme-inhibiting drugs to enzymes

Cross Discipline Analysis made possible with Data Pipelining. J.R. Tozer SciTegic

Supporting Information Strong Luminescent Copper(I)-halide Coordination Polymers and Dinuclear Complexes with Thioacetamide and N,N-donor ligands

Implementation of novel tools to facilitate fragment-based drug discovery by NMR:

Department of Biochemistry, University of Zürich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland

Molecular Modelling. Computational Chemistry Demystified. RSC Publishing. Interprobe Chemical Services, Lenzie, Kirkintilloch, Glasgow, UK

Chemogenomic: Approaches to Rational Drug Design. Jonas Skjødt Møller

Supplementary Figure 1

Supplementary Information

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supporting Information

An Enhancement of Bayesian Inference Network for Ligand-Based Virtual Screening using Features Selection

Joana Pereira Lamzin Group EMBL Hamburg, Germany. Small molecules How to identify and build them (with ARP/wARP)

Molecular Dynamics Graphical Visualization 3-D QSAR Pharmacophore QSAR, COMBINE, Scoring Functions, Homology Modeling,..

György M. Keserű H2020 FRAGNET Network Hungarian Academy of Sciences

Hydrogen Bonding & Molecular Design Peter

Supplementary Figure 1. Biochemical and sequence alignment analyses the

A Tiered Screen Protocol for the Discovery of Structurally Diverse HIV Integrase Inhibitors

The PhilOEsophy. There are only two fundamental molecular descriptors

Introduction. OntoChem

Generative Models for Chemical Structures

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

User Guide for LeDock

Virtual Screening: How Are We Doing?

Virtual screening in drug discovery

Phase problem: Determining an initial phase angle α hkl for each recorded reflection. 1 ρ(x,y,z) = F hkl cos 2π (hx+ky+ lz - α hkl ) V h k l

What is Protein-Ligand Docking?

Supplementary Information

SNC2D CHEMISTRY 2/18/2013. CHEMICAL REACTIONS L Ionic & Molecular Compounds (P & ) Compounds. Compounds

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Protein structure based approaches to inhibit Plasmodium DHODH for malaria

Supporting Information

Structurale, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, CEA, Grenoble, France

Pose and affinity prediction by ICM in D3R GC3. Max Totrov Molsoft

Generating Small Molecule Conformations from Structural Data

Chemical properties that affect binding of enzyme-inhibiting drugs to enzymes

Molecular Complexity Effects and Fingerprint-Based Similarity Search Strategies

Identifying Interaction Hot Spots with SuperStar

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Electronic Supplementary Information (ESI) for Chem. Commun. Unveiling the three- dimensional structure of the green pigment of nitrite- cured meat

Introduction to FBDD Fragment screening methods and library design

Supporting Information

Cheminformatics analysis and learning in a data pipelining environment

Chemical library design

5.1. Hardwares, Softwares and Web server used in Molecular modeling

Medicinal Chemistry/ CHEM 458/658 Chapter 4- Computer-Aided Drug Design

Supporting Information

KNIME-based scoring functions in Muse 3.0. KNIME User Group Meeting 2013 Fabian Bös

In Silico Design of New Drugs for Myeloid Leukemia Treatment

The reuse of structural data for fragment binding site prediction

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Structural basis of laminin binding to the LARGE glycans on dystroglycan

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Table 1. Crystallographic data collection, phasing and refinement statistics. Native Hg soaked Mn soaked 1 Mn soaked 2

De Novo molecular design with Deep Reinforcement Learning

Virtual Libraries and Virtual Screening in Drug Discovery Processes using KNIME

Using AutoDock for Virtual Screening

Life Science Webinar Series

Data Quality Issues That Can Impact Drug Discovery

MM-PBSA Validation Study. Trent E. Balius Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics AMS

Using Phase for Pharmacophore Modelling. 5th European Life Science Bootcamp March, 2017

Supplementary Information. Structural basis for precursor protein-directed ribosomal peptide macrocyclization

Bioengineering & Bioinformatics Summer Institute, Dept. Computational Biology, University of Pittsburgh, PGH, PA

Ignasi Belda, PhD CEO. HPC Advisory Council Spain Conference 2015

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supporting Information

Hit Finding and Optimization Using BLAZE & FORGE

Ligand Scout Tutorials

Stabilizing the CH2 domain of an Antibody by Engineering in an Enhanced Aromatic Sequon

Supporting Information

IgE binds asymmetrically to its B cell receptor CD23

Supplementary Methods

Structure-Based Drug Discovery An Overview

Development of Pharmacophore Model for Indeno[1,2-b]indoles as Human Protein Kinase CK2 Inhibitors and Database Mining

A versatile salt-metathesis route to heteroatomic clusters derived from phosphorus and arsenic Zintl anions

DOCKING TUTORIAL. A. The docking Workflow

Binding Response: A Descriptor for Selecting Ligand Binding Site on Protein Surfaces

Enhancing Specificity in the Janus Kinases: A Study on the Thienopyridine. JAK2 Selective Mechanism Combined Molecular Dynamics Simulation

Transcription:

upplementary Material Molecular docking and ligand specificity in fragmentbased inhibitor discovery Chen & hoichet 26

27 (a) 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 13 14 17 18 19 (b) (c)

igure 1 Inhibitors identified against CTXM. K i values were determined for compounds 14, 6, 11, 12, 13 and 14, the first seven of which were also crystallized. (a) ragment inhibitors identified by molecular docking. All had IC 50 ~mm. Compounds 1, 4, 5 were also previously identified as inhibitors against AmpC. (b) Leadlike tetrazole compounds selected by molecular docking. Their Ki values ranged from mm to submm with the best at 21 μm (compound 12). (c) Analogs of the most potent tetrazole inhibitor from docking, identified by similarity search. All inhibited CTXM at 250 μm and the best has Ki at 10 μm (compound 13). 28

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 2 30 31 32 33 34 + 35 36 37 38 39 2 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 29

+ 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 igure 2 onbinding fragments selected by docking. These compounds did not inhibit CTXM when tested at up to 5 mm concentrations, or as their solubility allowed. 30

79 80 81 83 84 85 87 88 89 2 82 86 90 91 92 93 3 + 94 95 96 97 98 99 P Br + P 100 101 102 103 104 31

105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 igure 3 onbinding leadlike compounds selected by docking. These compounds did not inhibit CTXM when tested at up to 5 mm concentrations, or as their solubility allowed. 32

Table 1 ragment database compounds most similar to ligands # ligand 1 2 3 4 Whole database a uster centers b Random cluster set c structure score d structure score structure score 5 6 7 8 9 2 2 0.3878 0.4688 0.7500 0.3125 0.4324 0.3077 0.7273 + 0.2857 0.6829 0.4872 2 2 0.4250 2 0.7037 0.6250 Br + 2 0.2708 0.3571 0.3571 0.2973 2 Ṉ 0.2449 0.3243 0.2889 0.4545 0.3636 0.2745 0.3250 0.3636 0.2979 0.3600 10 0.4167 0.3077 0.3158 a. Latest fragment subset of ZIC database, 317,000 compounds. b. The compounds that are the centers of the 2500 clusters from the fragment database. c. The compounds randomly chosen from the 2500 clusters (one from each cluster). d. Tanimoto similarity score between the ligand and the compound using ECP4 fingerprint. 33

Table 2 * Values in parenthesis represent highest resolution shells. Crystallographic statistics Compound # 1 2 3 4 6 11 12 Data collection pace group P2 1 P2 1 P322 1 P2 1 P2 1 P2 1 P2 1 Cell dimensions a, b, c (Å) 45.154 106.877 47.703 α, β, γ ( ) 101.906 45.211 107.256 47.512 101.678 50.0 1.50 (1.551.50) 41.803 41.803 230.542 120.000 50.0 1.80 (1.861.80) 45.279 106.765 47.777 101.74 501.70 (1.761.70) 45.110 107.098 47.477 101.660 50.01.31 (1.361.31) 45.141 106.886 47.445 101.628 50.01.31 (1.361.31) 45.265 107.243 47.727 99.932 Resolution ( Å) 50.01.31 (1.361.31)* 50.0 1.41 (1.461.41) R merge (%) 5.1 (21.2) 4.6 (34.5) 5.6 (57.1) 7.7 (34.1) 5.1 (27.1) 4.7 (24.9) 4.4 (30.0) I / σi 11.3(2.9) 15.0 (2.0) 20.7 (2.0) 10.8 (2.4) 20.6 (4.0) 22.6 (5.1) 16.7 (2.6) Completeness(%) 91.6 (96.7) 98.3 (93.5) 99.7 (98.5) 98.6 (87.1) 99.4 (98.3) 99.9 (99.9) 98.6 (94.0) Redundancy 1.8 (1.7) 2.5 (2.0) 7.4 (5.9) 3.5 (2.9) 3.9 (3.7) 3.9 (3.6) 2.5 (2.2) Refinement Resolution (Å) 50.01.31 (1.361.31) 50.01.50 (1.551.50) 50.01.80 (1.861.80) 50.01.70 (1.761.70) 50.01.31 (1.361.31) 50.01.31 (1.361.31) 50.01.41 (1.461.41) o. reflections 96597 (10197) 69190 (6567) 22803 (2167) 48236 (4241) 104717(10346) 106059(10591) 84588 (8057) R work /R free 16.1 / 18.8 15.1/ 18.8 20.8 / 24.5 16.8 / 20.3 15.2 / 18.2 15.5 (18.0) 15.5 / 18.2 o. atoms Protein 4057 3989 1997 3952 4064 4051 3996 Ligand/ion 40 54 51 107 83 102 134 Water 613 576 157 356 677 652 607 Bfactors (Å 2 ) Protein 11.39 16.90 24.25 14.71 11.96 11.14 14.52 Ligand/ion 23.68 22.50 35.41 27.33 20.83 16.73 25.36 Water 23.25 30.95 33.12 23.13 26.33 24.65 30.11 r.m.s. deviations bond lengths (Å) 0.007 0.008 0.017 0.012 0.006 0.006 0.007 bond angles ( ) 1.385 1.277 1.697 1.668 1.393 1.325 1.164 34