TY - JOUR
T1 - Chemical Space Overlap with Critical Protein–Protein Interface Residues in Commercial and Specialized Small-Molecule Libraries
AU - Si, Yubing
AU - Xu, David
AU - Bum-Erdene, Khuchtumur
AU - Ghozayel, Mona K.
AU - Yang, Baocheng
AU - Clemons, Paul A.
AU - Meroueh, Samy O.
N1 - This research was supported by the US National Institutes of Health (R01CA197928 to S.O.M.) and the American Cancer Society Research Scholar Grant RSG-12-092-01-CDD (S.O.M.). This work was done using resources provided by the Open Science Grid, which is supported by the US National Science Foundation award 1148698, and the US Department of Energy’s Office of Science. We are grateful to Joshua Bittker, Karen Emmith, and Carol Mulrooney from the Broad Institute Compound Management team, and to Vlado Dancik, for assistance with DOS structure cleanup and compound registration.
This research was supported by the US National Institutes of Health (R01CA197928 to S.O.M.) and the American Cancer Society Research Scholar Grant RSG-12-092-01-CDD (S.O.M.). This work was done using resources provided by the Open Science Grid, which is supported by the US National Science Foundation award 1148698, and the US Department of Energy's Office of Science. We are grateful to Joshua Bittker, Karen Emmith, and Carol Mulrooney from the Broad Institute Compound Management team, and to Vlado Dancik, for assistance with DOS structure cleanup and compound registration.
PY - 2019/1/8
Y1 - 2019/1/8
N2 - There is growing interest in the use of structure-based virtual screening to identify small molecules that inhibit challenging protein–protein interactions (PPIs). In this study, we investigated how effectively chemical library members docked at the PPI interface mimic the position of critical side-chain residues known as “hot spots”. Three compound collections were considered, a commercially available screening collection (ChemDiv), a collection of diversity-oriented synthesis (DOS) compounds that contains natural-product-like small molecules, and a library constructed using established reactions (the “screenable chemical universe based on intuitive data organization”, SCUBIDOO). Three different tight PPIs for which hot-spot residues have been identified were selected for analysis: uPAR⋅uPA, TEAD4⋅Yap1, and Ca V α⋅Ca V β. Analysis of library physicochemical properties was followed by docking to the PPI receptors. A pharmacophore method was used to measure overlap between small-molecule substituents and hot-spot side chains. Fragment-like conformationally restricted small molecules showed better hot-spot overlap for interfaces with well-defined pockets such as uPAR⋅uPA, whereas better overlap was observed for more complex DOS compounds in interfaces lacking a well-defined binding site such as TEAD4⋅Yap1. Virtual screening of conformationally restricted compounds targeting uPAR⋅uPA and TEAD4⋅Yap1 followed by experimental validation reinforce these findings, as the best hits were fragment-like and had few rotatable bonds for the former, while no hits were identified for the latter. Overall, such studies provide a framework for understanding PPIs in the context of additional chemical matter and new PPI definitions.
AB - There is growing interest in the use of structure-based virtual screening to identify small molecules that inhibit challenging protein–protein interactions (PPIs). In this study, we investigated how effectively chemical library members docked at the PPI interface mimic the position of critical side-chain residues known as “hot spots”. Three compound collections were considered, a commercially available screening collection (ChemDiv), a collection of diversity-oriented synthesis (DOS) compounds that contains natural-product-like small molecules, and a library constructed using established reactions (the “screenable chemical universe based on intuitive data organization”, SCUBIDOO). Three different tight PPIs for which hot-spot residues have been identified were selected for analysis: uPAR⋅uPA, TEAD4⋅Yap1, and Ca V α⋅Ca V β. Analysis of library physicochemical properties was followed by docking to the PPI receptors. A pharmacophore method was used to measure overlap between small-molecule substituents and hot-spot side chains. Fragment-like conformationally restricted small molecules showed better hot-spot overlap for interfaces with well-defined pockets such as uPAR⋅uPA, whereas better overlap was observed for more complex DOS compounds in interfaces lacking a well-defined binding site such as TEAD4⋅Yap1. Virtual screening of conformationally restricted compounds targeting uPAR⋅uPA and TEAD4⋅Yap1 followed by experimental validation reinforce these findings, as the best hits were fragment-like and had few rotatable bonds for the former, while no hits were identified for the latter. Overall, such studies provide a framework for understanding PPIs in the context of additional chemical matter and new PPI definitions.
KW - compound libraries
KW - computational chemistry
KW - protein–protein interactions
KW - virtual screening
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85058858487
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85058858487#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1002/cmdc.201800537
DO - 10.1002/cmdc.201800537
M3 - Article
C2 - 30548204
AN - SCOPUS:85058858487
SN - 1860-7179
VL - 14
SP - 119
EP - 131
JO - ChemMedChem
JF - ChemMedChem
IS - 1
ER -