Machine learning in computational docking.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this paper is to highlight the state-of-the-art machine learning (ML) techniques in computational docking. The use of smart computational methods in the life cycle of drug design is relatively a recent development that has gained much popularity and interest over the last few years. Central to this methodology is the notion of computational docking which is the process of predicting the best pose (orientation + conformation) of a small molecule (drug candidate) when bound to a target larger receptor molecule (protein) in order to form a stable complex molecule. In computational docking, a large number of binding poses are evaluated and ranked using a scoring function. The scoring function is a mathematical predictive model that produces a score that represents the binding free energy, and hence the stability, of the resulting complex molecule. Generally, such a function should produce a set of plausible ligands ranked according to their binding stability along with their binding poses. In more practical terms, an effective scoring function should produce promising drug candidates which can then be synthesized and physically screened using high throughput screening process. Therefore, the key to computer-aided drug design is the design of an efficient highly accurate scoring function (using ML techniques).


METHODS
The methods presented in this paper are specifically based on ML techniques. Despite many traditional techniques have been proposed, the performance was generally poor. Only in the last few years started the application of the ML technology in the design of scoring functions; and the results have been very promising.


METHODS
The ML-based techniques are based on various molecular features extracted from the abundance of protein-ligand information in the public molecular databases, e.g., protein data bank bind (PDBbind).


RESULTS
In this paper, we present this paradigm shift elaborating on the main constituent elements of the ML approach to molecular docking along with the state-of-the-art research in this area. For instance, the best random forest (RF)-based scoring function on PDBbind v2007 achieves a Pearson correlation coefficient between the predicted and experimentally determined binding affinities of 0.803 while the best conventional scoring function achieves 0.644. The best RF-based ranking power ranks the ligands correctly based on their experimentally determined binding affinities with accuracy 62.5% and identifies the top binding ligand with accuracy 78.1%.


CONCLUSIONS
We conclude with open questions and potential future research directions that can be pursued in smart computational docking; using molecular features of different nature (geometrical, energy terms, pharmacophore), advanced ML techniques (e.g., deep learning), combining more than one ML models.
Cyber-Physical Systems Lab, Egypt-Japan University of Science and Technology (E-JUST), P.O. Box 179, New Borg El-Arab City, 21934 Alexandria, Egypt. Electronic address: mohamed.khamis@ejust.edu.eg.
Mohamed A
MA
Khamis
Cyber-Physical Systems Lab, Egypt-Japan University of Science and Technology (E-JUST), P.O. Box 179, New Borg El-Arab City, 21934 Alexandria, Egypt; Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Alexandria 21544, Egypt. Electronic address: walid.gomaa@ejust.edu.eg.
Walid
W
Gomaa
Cyber-Physical Systems Lab, Egypt-Japan University of Science and Technology (E-JUST), P.O. Box 179, New Borg El-Arab City, 21934 Alexandria, Egypt. Electronic address: wella_dba@yahoo.com.
Walaa F
WF
Ahmed
D019295:Computational Biology / Q000379:methods*; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D030562:Databases, Protein; D006801:Humans; D008024:Ligands; D000069550:Machine Learning; D011485:Protein Binding; D011487:Protein Conformation; D011506:Proteins / Q000737:chemistry*; D011789:Quantum Theory
D008024:Ligands; D011506:Proteins
Complex binding affinity; Computational docking; Drug discovery; Force field interaction; Ligands ranking accuracy; Machine learning; Pharmacophore fingerprint; Random forest; Scoring function; Support vector machine; Virtual screening