Categories
Nevin Manimala Statistics

Practical Guidance for Consensus Scoring and Force Field Selection in Protein-Ligand Binding Free Energy Simulations

J Chem Inf Model. 2022 Nov 18. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01115. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

The advances in ligand binding affinity prediction have been fostered by system generation tools and improved force fields (FFs). CHARMM-GUI Free Energy Calculator provides input and postprocessing scripts for AMBER-TI free energy calculations with various FFs. In this study, we used 12 different FF combinations (ff14SB and ff19SB for protein, GAFF2.2 and OpenFF for ligand, and TIP3P, TIP4PEW, and OPC for water) to calculate relative binding free energies (ΔΔGbind) for 80 alchemical transformations (among the JACS benchmark set) with different numbers of λ windows (12 or 21) and simulation times (1, 5, or 10 ns). Our results show that 12 λ windows and 5 ns simulation time for each window are sufficient to obtain reliable ΔΔGbind with 4 independent runs for the current benchmark set. While there is no statistically noticeable performance difference among 12 different FF combinations compared to the experimental values, a combination of ff14SB + GAFF2.2 + TIP3P FFs appears to be best with a mean unsigned error of 0.87 [0.69, 1.07] kcal/mol, a root-mean-square error of 1.22 [0.94, 1.50] kcal/mol, a Pearson’s correlation of 0.64 [0.52, 0.76], a Spearman’s correlation of 0.73 [0.58, 0.83], and a Kendell’s correlation of 0.54 [0.42, 0.64]. This large-scale ΔΔGbind calculation study provides useful information about ΔΔGbind prediction with different AMBER FF combinations and presents valuable suggestions for FF selection in AMBER-TI ΔΔGbind calculations.

PMID:36399655 | DOI:10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01115

By Nevin Manimala

Portfolio Website for Nevin Manimala