Computing the binding affinity of a ligand buried deep inside a protein with the hybrid steered molecular dynamics

Computing the ligand-protein binding affinity (or the Gibbs free energy) with chemical accuracy has long been a challenge for which many methods/approaches have been developed and refined with various successful applications. False positives and, even more harmful, false negatives have been and still are a common occurrence in practical applications. Inevitable in all approaches are the errors in the force field parameters we obtain from quantum mechanical computation and/or empirical fittings for the intra-and inter-molecular interactions. These errors propagate to the final results of the computed binding affinities even if we were able to perfectly implement the statistical mechanics of all the processes relevant to a given problem. And they are actually amplified to various degrees even in the mature, sophisticated computational approaches. In particular, the free energy perturbation (alchemical) approaches amplify the errors in the force field parameters because they rely on extracting the small differences between similarly large numbers. In this paper, we develop a hybrid steered molecular dynamics (hSMD) approach to the difficult binding problems of a ligand buried deep inside a protein. Sampling the transition along a physical (not alchemical) dissociation path of opening up the binding cavity-pulling out the ligand-closing back the cavity, we can avoid the problem of error amplifications by not relying on small differences between similar numbers. We tested this new form of hSMD on retinol inside cellular retinol-binding protein 1 and three cases of a ligand (a benzylacetate, a 2-nitrothiophene, and a benzene) inside a T4 lysozyme L99A/M102Q(H) double mutant. In all cases, we obtained binding free energies in close agreement with the experimentally measured values. This indicates that the force field parameters we employed are accurate and that hSMD (a brute force, unsophisticated approach) is free from the problem of error amplification suffered by many sophisticated approaches in the literature. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.