skip to main content
10.1145/2808719.2811445acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbcbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Using motion planning to rank ligand binding affinity

Published:09 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

In the drug discovery process, pharmaceutical companies have to screen many drug (or ligand) candidates to find the most promising ones for trial. This process is very costly and attention as turned to computational approaches to predict binding affinity to the desired target protein. In this work, we develop a computational tool for ranking ligand binding affinity that uniformly samples ligand conformations over the target protein's surface and analyzes the resulting set to compute an affinity ranking. Experiments on one target protein shows that our method is able to correctly rank different ligands for the target protein as determined by experimental data. Our method is a promising technique and potential cost-saving tool for pharmaceutical companies to narrow the search for good drug candidate.

References

  1. O. B. Bayazit, G. Song, and N. M. Amato. Ligand binding with OBPRM and haptic user input: Enhancing automatic motion planning with virtual touch. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom. (ICRA), pages 954--959, 2001. This work was also presented as a poster at RECOMB 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. J. CortÃl's, T. SimÃl'on, V. R. de Angulo, D. Guieysse, M. Remaud-SimÃl'on, and V. Tran. A path planning approach for computing large-amplitude motions of flexible molecules. In ISMB (Supplement of Bioinformatics), pages 116--125, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. P. Hughes, S. Rees, S. B. Kalindjian, and K. L. Philpott. Principles of Early Drug Discovery. British journal of pharmacology, 162(6):1239--1249, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M. Levitt. Protein folding by restrained energy minimization and molecular dynamics. J. Mol. Biol., 170:723--764, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. T. Liu, Y. Lin, X. Wen, R. N. Jorissen, and M. K. Gilson. BindingDB: a web-accessible database of experimentally determined protein-ligand binding affinities. Nucleic Acids Res, 35:198--201, Jan. 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. A. P. Singh, J.-C. Latombe, and D. L. Brutlag. A motion planning approach to flexible ligand binding. In Int. Conf. on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology (ISMB), pages 252--261, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. H.-Y. C. Yeh, J. Denny, A. Lindsey, S. Thomas, and N. M. Amato. UMAPRM: Uniformly sampling the medial axis. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom. (ICRA), pages 5798--5803, Hong Kong, China, June 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. H.-Y. C. Yeh, S. Thomas, D. Eppstein, and N. M. Amato. UOBPRM: A uniformly distributed obstacle-based PRM. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Intel. Rob. Syst. (IROS), pages 2655--2662, Vilamoura, Algarve, Portugal, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Using motion planning to rank ligand binding affinity

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            BCB '15: Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology and Health Informatics
            September 2015
            683 pages
            ISBN:9781450338530
            DOI:10.1145/2808719

            Copyright © 2015 Owner/Author

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 9 September 2015

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • poster

            Acceptance Rates

            BCB '15 Paper Acceptance Rate48of141submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate254of885submissions,29%
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader