Benchmarking Commercial Conformer Ensemble Generators

被引:88
作者
Friedrich, Nils-Ole [1 ]
Kops, Christina de Bruyn [1 ]
Flachsenberg, Florian [1 ]
Sommer, Kai [1 ]
Rarey, Matthias [1 ]
Kirchmair, Johannes [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hamburg, Ctr Bioinformat, Bundesstr 43, D-20146 Hamburg, Germany
关键词
PROTEIN DATA-BANK; FORCE-FIELD; CONFORMATIONAL SEARCH; ALGORITHM; MOLECULES;
D O I
10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00505
中图分类号
R914 [药物化学];
学科分类号
100701 ;
摘要
We assess and compare the performance of eight commercial conformer ensemble generators (ConfGen, CorifGenX, cxcalc, iCon, MOE LowModeMD, MOE Stochastic, MOE Conformation Import, and OMEGA) and one leading free algorithm, the distance geometry algorithm implemented in RD)Kit. The comparative study is based on a new version of the Platinum Diverse Dataset, a high-quality benchmarking dataset of 2859 protein-bound ligand conformations extracted from the PDB. Differences in the performance of commercial algorithms are much smaller than those observed for free algorithms in our previous study (J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2017, 57, 529-539). For commercial algorithms, the median minimum root-mean-square deviations measured between protein-bound ligand conformations and ensembles of a maximum of 250 conformers are between 0.46 and 0:61 angstrom. Commercial conformer ensemble generators are characterized by their high robustness, with at least 99% of all input molecules successfully processed and few or even no substantial geometrical errors detectable in their output conformations. The RDKit distance geometry algorithm (with minimization enabled) appears to be a good free alternative since its performance is comparable to that of the midranked commercial algorithms. Based on a statistical analysis, we elaborate on which algorithms to use and how to parametrize them for best performance in different application scenarios.
引用
收藏
页码:2719 / 2728
页数:10
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2016, CONFG VERS 2016 2 SC
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2015, CXC VERS 15 8 31 0 P
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2017, OMEGA VERS 2 5 1 4 O
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2017, MOL OP ENV VERS 2016
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2017, ICON PART LIG VERS 4
[6]   The Protein Data Bank [J].
Berman, HM ;
Westbrook, J ;
Feng, Z ;
Gilliland, G ;
Bhat, TN ;
Weissig, H ;
Shindyalov, IN ;
Bourne, PE .
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH, 2000, 28 (01) :235-242
[7]   Conformational sampling of druglike molecules with MOE and catalyst: Implications for pharmacophore modeling and virtual screening [J].
Chen, I-Jen ;
Foloppe, Nicolas .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL INFORMATION AND MODELING, 2008, 48 (09) :1773-1791
[8]   Remarks about protein structure precision [J].
Cruickshank, DWJ .
ACTA CRYSTALLOGRAPHICA SECTION D-STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY, 1999, 55 :583-601
[9]   Freely Available Conformer Generation Methods: How Good Are They? [J].
Ebejer, Jean-Paul ;
Morris, Garrett M. ;
Deane, Charlotte M. .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL INFORMATION AND MODELING, 2012, 52 (05) :1146-1158
[10]   High-Quality Dataset of Protein-Bound Ligand Conformations and Its Application to Benchmarking Conformer Ensemble Generators [J].
Friedrich, Nils-Ole ;
Meyder, Agnes ;
Kops, Christina de Bruyn ;
Sommer, Kai ;
Flachsenberg, Florian ;
Rarey, Matthias ;
Kirchmair, Johannes .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL INFORMATION AND MODELING, 2017, 57 (03) :529-539