A QM/MM study of the binding of RAPTA ligands to cathepsin B
- 322 Downloads
We have carried out quantum mechanical (QM) and QM/MM (combined QM and molecular mechanics) calculations, as well as molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to study the binding of a series of six RAPTA (Ru(II)-arene-1,3,5-triaza-7-phosphatricyclo-[126.96.36.199] decane) complexes with different arene substituents to cathepsin B. The recently developed QM/MM-PBSA approach (QM/MM combined with Poisson–Boltzmann solvent-accessible surface area solvation) has been used to estimate binding affinities. The QM calculations reproduce the antitumour activities of the complexes with a correlation coefficient (r 2) of 0.35–0.86 after a conformational search. The QM/MM-PBSA method gave a better correlation (r 2 = 0.59) when the protein was fixed to the crystal structure, but more reasonable ligand structures and absolute binding energies were obtained if the protein was allowed to relax, indicating that the ligands are strained when the protein is kept fixed. In addition, the best correlation (r 2 = 0.80) was obtained when only the QM energies were used, which suggests that the MM and continuum solvation energies are not accurate enough to predict the binding of a charged metal complex to a charged protein. Taking into account the protein flexibility by means of MD simulations slightly improves the correlation (r 2 = 0.91), but the absolute energies are still too large and the results are sensitive to the details in the calculations, illustrating that it is hard to obtain stable predictions when full flexible protein is included in the calculations.
KeywordsQM/MM Ligand-binding affinities Ruthenium Anticancer drugs Cathepsin B Continuum solvation QM/MM-PBSA
We thank Dr. Alessandro Marrone who provided us the initial docked structures. This investigation has been supported by grants from the Swedish research council (project 2010-5025) and from the Research school in pharmaceutical science. It has also been supported by computer resources of Lunarc at Lund University and HPC2N at Umeå University.
- 2.Nobili S, Mini E, Landini I, Gabbiani C, Casini A, Messori L (2010) Med Res Rev 30:550–580Google Scholar
- 19.Bergamo A, Masi A, Dyson PJ, Sava G (2008) Intern J Oncol 33:1281–1289Google Scholar
- 46.Klamt A, Schüürmann J (1993) J Chem Soc Perkin Trans 2:799–805Google Scholar
- 49.Jensen F (1999) Introduction to computational chemistry. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
- 52.Huber CP, Campbell RL, Hasnain S, Hirama T to be published PDB file 2IPPGoogle Scholar
- 53.Case DA, Darden TA, Cheatham TE III, Simmerling CL, Wang J, Duke RE, Luo R, Walker RC, Zhang W, Merz KM, Roberts BP, Wang B, Hayik S, Roitberg A, Seabra G, Kolossváry I, Wong KF, Paesani F, Vanicek J, Wu X, Brozell SR, Steinbrecher T, Gohlke H, Yang L, Tan C, Mongan J, Hornak V, Cui G, Mathews DH, Seetin MG, Sagui C, Babin V, Kollman PA (2008) AMBER 10. University of California, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
- 64.Hornak V, Abel R, Okur A, Strockbine B, Roitberg A, Simmerling C (2006) Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinform 65:712–725Google Scholar
- 69.Frisch MJ, Trucks GW, Schlegel HB, Scuseria GE, Robb MA, Cheeseman JR, Montgomery JA Jr, Vreven T, Kudin KN, Burant JC, Millam JM, Iyengar SS, Tomasi J, Barone V, Mennucci B, Cossi M, Scalmani G, Rega N, Petersson GA, Nakatsuji H, Hada M, Ehara M, Toyota K, Fukuda R, Hasegawa J, Ishida M, Nakajima T, Honda Y, Kitao O, Nakai H, Klene M, Li X, Knox JE, Hratchian HP, Cross JB, Bakken V, Adamo C, Jaramillo J, Gomperts R, Stratmann RE, Yazyev O, Austin A J, Cammi R, Pomelli C, Ochterski JW, Ayala PY, Morokuma K, Voth GA, Salvador P, Dannenberg JJ, Zakrzewski VG, Dapprich S, Daniels AD, Strain MC, Farkas O, Malick DK, Rabuck AD, Raghavachari K, Foresman JB, Ortiz JV, Cui Q, Baboul AG, Clifford S, Cioslowski J, Stefanov BB, Liu G, Liashenko A, Piskorz P, Komaromi I, Martin RL, Fox DJ, Keith T, Al-Laham MA, Peng CY, Nanayakkara A, Challacombe M, Gill PMW, Johnson B, Chen W, Wong MW, Gonzalez C, Pople JA (2004) Gaussian 03, Revision C.02, Gaussian, WallingfordGoogle Scholar