skip to main content
10.1145/3388440.3412487acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbcbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

GANDALF: Peptide Generation for Drug Design using Sequential and Structural Generative Adversarial Networks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:10 November 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Computational drug design has the potential to save time and money by providing a better starting point for new drugs with a complete computational evaluation. We propose a peptide design system for protein targets based on a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) called GANDALF (Generative Adversarial Network Drug-tArget Ligand Fructifier). GAN based methods have been developed for computational drug design but these can only generate small molecules, not peptides. Peptides are very complex macromolecules which makes them much more difficult than small molecules to generate. Our GANDALF methodology uses two networks to generate a new peptide sequence and structure. It also incorporates data such as active atoms not used in other methods. Active atoms are important because they interact via electron sharing when a target protein and a peptide bind to each other. We can identify the active atoms using our electron structure calculation (eCADD) program and the rules of interaction we have developed. Our method goes farther than comparable methods by generating a full peptide structure as well as predicting binding affinity. The results were validated using a multi-step process comparing the results with FDA approved drugs and our initial prototype method. We have generated multiple peptides for three targets of interest (PD-1, PDL-1, and CTLA-4) and have found that the best generated peptide for each target was comparable to the FDA approved drugs in binding affinity and fitness of 3D binding as well as show the generated peptides were unique from the existing FDA drugs.

References

  1. Rolf Apweiler, Amos Bairoch, Cathy H Wu, Winona C Barker, Brigitte Boeckmann, Serenella Ferro, Elisabeth Gasteiger, Hongzhan Huang, Rodrigo Lopez, Michele Magrane, et al. 2004. UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase. Nucleic acids research 32, suppl_1 (2004), D115--D119.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Shaojie Bai, J Zico Kolter, and Vladlen Koltun. 2018. An empirical evaluation of generic convolutional and recurrent networks for sequence modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.01271 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Helen M Berman, John Westbrook, Zukang Feng, Gary Gilliland, Talapady N Bhat, Helge Weissig, Ilya N Shindyalov, and Philip E Bourne. 2000. The protein data bank. Nucleic acids research 28, 1 (2000), 235--242.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Christies. 2018. Is artificial intelligence set to become art's next medium? https://www.christies.com/features/A-collaboration-between-two-artists- one-human-one-a-machine-9332-1.aspxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Sander Dieleman, Aaron van den Oord, and Karen Simonyan. 2018. The challenge of realistic music generation: modelling raw audio at scale. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 7989--7999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Joseph A DiMasi, Henry G Grabowski, and Ronald W Hansen. 2016. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: new estimates of R&D costs. Journal of health economics 47 (2016), 20--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Hao-Wen Dong, Wen-Yi Hsiao, Li-Chia Yang, and Yi-Hsuan Yang. 2018. MuseGAN: Multi-track sequential generative adversarial networks for symbolic music generation and accompaniment. In Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Joe Dundas, Zheng Ouyang, Jeffery Tseng, Andrew Binkowski, Yaron Turpaz, and Jie Liang. 2006. CASTp: computed atlas of surface topography of proteins with structural and topographical mapping of functionally annotated residues. Nucleic acids research 34, suppl_2 (2006), W116-W118.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. US Food, Drug Administration, et al. 2016. Drugs@ FDA: FDA approved drug products.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. Generative adversarial nets. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 2672--2680.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Jiaxian Guo, Sidi Lu, Han Cai, Weinan Zhang, Yong Yu, and Jun Wang. 2018. Long text generation via adversarial training with leaked information. In Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Axel Hoos. 2016. Development of immuno-oncology drugs---from CTLA4 to PD1 to the next generations. Nature reviews Drug discovery 15, 4 (2016), 235.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferenc Huszár. 2015. How (not) to train your generative model: Scheduled sampling, likelihood, adversary? arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.05101 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Brian Jiménez-García, Carles Pons, and Juan Fernández-Recio. 2013. pyDockWEB: a web server for rigid-body protein-protein docking using electrostatics and desolvation scoring. Bioinformatics 29, 13 (2013), 1698--1699.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Naman Kohli, Daksha Yadav, Mayank Vatsa, Richa Singh, and Afzel Noore. 2017. Synthetic iris presentation attack using iDCGAN. In Biometrics (IJCB), 2017 IEEE International Joint Conference on. IEEE, 674--680.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Colin Lea, Rene Vidal, Austin Reiter, and Gregory D Hager. 2016. Temporal convolutional networks: A unified approach to action segmentation. In European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 47--54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Mustafa Mustafa, Deborah Bard, Wahid Bhimji, Zarija Lukić, Rami Al-Rfou, and Jan M Kratochvil. 2019. CosmoGAN: creating high-fidelity weak lensing convergence maps using Generative Adversarial Networks. Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology 6, 1 (2019), 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Augustus Odena, Christopher Olah, and Jonathon Shlens. 2017. Conditional image synthesis with auxiliary classifier gans. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning-Volume 70. JMLR. org, 2642--2651.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Aaron van den Oord, Sander Dieleman, Heiga Zen, Karen Simonyan, Oriol Vinyals, Alex Graves, Nal Kalchbrenner, Andrew Senior, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. 2016. Wavenet: A generative model for raw audio. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.03499 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Anton Osokin, Anatole Chessel, Rafael E Carazo Salas, and Federico Vaggi. 2017. GANs for biological image synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. 2233--2242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Santiago Pascual, Antonio Bonafonte, and Joan Serra. 2017. SEGAN: Speech enhancement generative adversarial network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.09452 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Peter W Rose, Bojan Beran, Chunxiao Bi, Wolfgang F Bluhm, Dimitris Dimitropoulos, David S Goodsell, Andreas Prlić, Martha Quesada, Gregory B Quinn, John D Westbrook, et al. 2010. The RCSB Protein Data Bank: redesigned web site and web services. Nucleic acids research 39, suppl_1 (2010), D392--D401.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Allison M Rossetto, Wenjin Zhou, Xiaodong Pang, and Linxiang Zhou. 2014. The full electron structure of the FKBP12/FK506 complex. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics 33, 2 (2014), 388--394.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Aliaksandr Siarohin, Enver Sangineto, Stéphane Lathuilière, and Nicu Sebe. 2018. Deformable gans for pose-based human image generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 3408--3416.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Fabian Sievers, Andreas Wilm, David Dineen, Toby J Gibson, Kevin Karplus, Weizhong Li, Rodrigo Lopez, Hamish McWilliam, Michael Remmert, Johannes Söding, et al. 2011. Fast, scalable generation of high-quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega. Molecular systems biology 7, 1 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Marta M Stepniewska-Dziubinska, Piotr Zielenkiewicz, and Pawel Siedlecki. 2018. Development and evaluation of a deep learning model for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction. Bioinformatics 1 (2018), 9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Lin Sun. 2018. Deeply learned representations for human action recognition.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Lin Sun, Kui Jia, Dit-Yan Yeung, and Bertram E Shi. 2015. Human action recognition using factorized spatio-temporal convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision. 4597--4605.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Yaniv Taigman, Adam Polyak, and Lior Wolf. 2016. Unsupervised cross-domain image generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.02200 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Wei Ren Tan, Chee Seng Chan, Hernán E Aguirre, and Kiyoshi Tanaka. 2017. Art-GAN: Artwork synthesis with conditional categorical GANs. In Image Processing (ICIP), 2017 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 3760--3764.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Salman Sadullah Usmani, Gursimran Bedi, Jesse S Samuel, Sandeep Singh, Sourav Kalra, Pawan Kumar, Anjuman Arora Ahuja, Meenu Sharma, Ankur Gautam, and Gajendra PS Raghava. 2017. THPdb: Database of FDA-approved peptide and protein therapeutics. PloS one 12, 7 (2017), e0181748.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Konstantinos Vougioukas, Stavros Petridis, and Maja Pantic. 2018. End-to-end speech-driven facial animation with temporal gans. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.09313 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Ting-Chun Wang, Ming-Yu Liu, Jun-Yan Zhu, Andrew Tao, Jan Kautz, and Bryan Catanzaro. 2018. High-resolution image synthesis and semantic manipulation with conditional gans. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 8798--8807.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Jingjing Xu, Xuancheng Ren, Junyang Lin, and Xu Sun. 2018. Diversity-Promoting GAN: A Cross-Entropy Based Generative Adversarial Network for Diversified Text Generation. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, Brussels, Belgium, 3940--3949. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D18--1428Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Jingjing Xu, Xuancheng Ren, Junyang Lin, and Xu Sun. 2018. DP-GAN: diversity-promoting generative adversarial network for generating informative and diversified text. arXiv preprint arXiv.1802.01345 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Li-Chia Yang, Szu-Yu Chou, and Yi-Hsuan Yang. 2017. MidiNet: A convolutional generative adversarial network for symbolic-domain music generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.10847 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Lantao Yu, Weinan Zhang, Jun Wang, and Yong Yu. 2017. Seqgan: Sequence generative adversarial nets with policy gradient. In Thirty-First AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Wenjin Zhou, Allison M Rossetto, Xiaodong Pang, and Linxiang Zhou. 2015. Computational full electron structure study of biological activity in Cyclophilin A. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics (2015), 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. GANDALF: Peptide Generation for Drug Design using Sequential and Structural Generative Adversarial Networks

        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 '20: Proceedings of the 11th ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology and Health Informatics
          September 2020
          193 pages
          ISBN:9781450379649
          DOI:10.1145/3388440

          Copyright © 2020 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 10 November 2020

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate254of885submissions,29%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader