Computational Drug Discovery and Design

(backadmin) #1
(PY) result by the empirical factor of 2, we get consistent and
coherent results for the full set of the studied systems. Since
these corrected values are overall closer to those calculated by
the GB method of the same PY script (as compared to the
GB/PB values from the PL script), we have a preference for
using the PY script, under the condition of doubling the PB
values. This particular requirement may not be necessary in
newer versions of AmberTools, but we have been unable to test
it for lack of access.

Acknowledgment


We acknowledge financial support from PICT—GenoToul plat-
form of Toulouse, CNRS, Universite ́ de Toulouse-UPS,
European structural funds, the Midi-Pyre ́ne ́es region, CNRS.
G.M. was supported by Ph.D. fellowships from Ministe`re de
l’enseignement supe ́rieur et de la Recherche (3 years) and from
Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer (1 year). We thank Alain Milon
and Pascal Demange for their critical reading of the manuscript,
which improved its final quality.

References



  1. Tarcsay A, Paragi G, Vass M, Jojart B, Bogar F,
    Keseru GM (2013) The impact of molecular
    dynamics sampling on the performance of vir-
    tual screening against GPCRs. J Chem Inf
    Model 53:2990 2999

  2. Barakat KH, Jordheim LP, Perez-Pineiro R,
    Wishart D, Dumontet C, Tuszynski JA
    (2012) Virtual screening and biological evalu-
    ation of inhibitors targeting the XPA-ERCC1
    interaction. PLoS One 7:e51329

  3. De Vivo M, Masetti M, Bottegoni G, Cavalli A
    (2016) Role of molecular dynamics and related
    methods in drug discovery. J Med Chem
    59:4035 4061

  4. Durrant JD, McCammon JA (2011) Molecular
    dynamics simulations and drug discovery.
    BMC Biol 9:71–79

  5. Galeazzi R (2009) Molecular dynamics as a
    tool in rational drug design: current status
    and some major applications. Curr Comput
    Aided Drug Des 5:225–240

  6. Hospital A, Goni JR, Orozco M, Gelpi JL
    (2015) Molecular dynamics simulations:
    advances and applications. Adv Appl Bioinform
    Chem 8:37–47

  7. Jiang L, Zhang X, Chen X, He Y, Qiao L,
    Zhang Y, Li G, Xiang Y (2015) Virtual screen-
    ing and molecular dynamics study of potential


negative allosteric modulators of mGluR1 from
Chinese herbs. Molecules 20:12769–12786


  1. Kundu A, Dutta A, Biswas P, Das AK, Ghosh
    AK (2015) Functional insights from molecular
    modeling, docking, and dynamics study of a
    cypoviral RNA dependent RNA polymerase. J
    Mol Graph Model 61:160–174

  2. Mirza SB, Salmas RE, Fatmi MQ, Durdagi S
    (2016) Virtual screening of eighteen million
    compounds against dengue virus: combined
    molecular docking and molecular dynamics
    simulations study. J Mol Graph Model
    66:99–107

  3. Moroy G, Sperandio O, Rielland S, Khemka S,
    Druart K, Goyal D, Perahia D, Miteva MA
    (2015) Sampling of conformational ensemble
    for virtual screening using molecular dynamics
    simulations and normal mode analysis. Future
    Med Chem 7:2317–2331

  4. Naresh KN, Sreekumar A, Rajan SS (2015)
    Structural insights into the interaction between
    molluscan hemocyanins and phenolic sub-
    strates: an in silico study using docking and
    molecular dynamics. J Mol Graph Model
    61:272–280

  5. Nichols SE, Baron R, Ivetac A, McCammon JA
    (2011) Predictive power of molecular


Molecular Dynamics in Virtual Screening 175
Free download pdf