In-silico guided discovery of novel CCR9 antagonists

Application of computational methods for class A GPCR Ligand discovery

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) are integral membrane proteins of considerable interest as targets for drug development due to their role in transmitting cellular signals in a multitude of biological processes. Of the six classes categorizing GPCR (A, B, C, D, E, and F), class A contains the largest number of therapeutically relevant GPCR. Despite their importance as drug targets, many challenges exist for the discovery of novel class A GPCR ligands serving as drug precursors. Though knowledge of the structural and functional characteristics of GPCR has grown significantly over the past 20 years, a large portion of GPCR lack reported, experimentally determined structures. Furthermore, many GPCR have no known endogenous and/or synthetic ligands, limiting further exploration of their biochemical, cellular, and physiological roles. While many successes in GPCR ligand discovery have resulted from experimental high-throughput screening, computational methods have played an increasingly important role in GPCR ligand identification in the past decade. Here we discuss computational techniques applied to GPCR ligand discovery. This review summarizes class A GPCR structure/function and provides an overview of many obstacles currently faced in GPCR ligand discovery. Furthermore, we discuss applications and recent successes of computational techniques used to predict GPCR structure as well as present a summary of ligand- and structure-based methods used to identify potential GPCR ligands. Finally, we discuss computational hit list generation and refinement and provide comprehensive workflows for GPCR ligand identification.

A comprehensive comparison of molecular feature representations for use in predictive modeling

Machine learning methods are commonly used for predicting molecular properties to accelerate material and drug design. An important part of this process is deciding how to represent the molecules. Typically, machine learning methods expect examples represented by vectors of values, and many methods for calculating molecular feature representations have been proposed. In this paper, we perform a comprehensive comparison of different molecular features, including traditional methods such as fingerprints and molecular descriptors, and recently proposed learnable representations based on neural networks. Feature representations are evaluated on 11 benchmark datasets, used for predicting properties and measures such as mutagenicity, melting points, activity, solubility, and IC50. Our experiments show that several molecular features work similarly well over all benchmark datasets. The ones that stand out most are Spectrophores, which give significantly worse performance than other features on most datasets. Molecular descriptors from the PaDEL library seem very well suited for predicting physical properties of molecules. Despite their simplicity, MACCS fingerprints performed very well overall. The results show that learnable representations achieve competitive performance compared to expert based representations. However, task-specific representations (graph convolutions and Weave methods) rarely offer any benefits, even though they are computationally more demanding. Lastly, combining different molecular feature representations typically does not give a noticeable improvement in performance compared to individual feature representations.

Characterising GPCR-ligand interactions using a fragment molecular orbital-based approach

There has been fantastic progress in solving GPCR crystal structures. However, the ability of X-ray crystallography to guide the drug discovery process for GPCR targets is limited by the availability of accurate tools to explore receptor-ligand interactions. Visual inspection and molecular mechanics approaches cannot explain the full complexity of molecular interactions. Quantum mechanical approaches (QM) are often too computationally expensive, but the fragment molecular orbital (FMO) method offers an excellent solution that combines accuracy, speed and the ability to reveal key interactions that would otherwise be hard to detect. Integration of GPCR crystallography or homology modelling with FMO reveals atomistic details of the individual contributions of each residue and water molecule towards ligand binding, including an analysis of their chemical nature.