The TIES (Thermodynamic Integration with Enhanced Sampling) protocol is a formally exact alchemical approach in computational chemistry to the calculation of relative binding free energies. The validity of TIES relies on the correctness of matching atoms across compared pairs of ligands, laying the foundation for the transformation along an alchemical pathway. We implement a flexible topology superimposition algorithm which uses an exhaustive joint-traversal for computing the largest common component(s). The algorithm is employed to enable matching and morphing of partial rings in the TIES protocol along with a validation study using 55 transformations and five different proteins from our previous work. We find that TIES 20 with the RESP charge system, using the new superimposition algorithm, reproduces the previous results with mean unsigned error of 0.75 kcal/mol with respect to the experimental data. Enabling the morphing of partial rings decreases the size of the alchemical region in the dualtopology transformations resulting in a significant improvement in the prediction precision. We find that increasing the ensemble size from 5 to 20 replicas per λ window only has a minimal impact on the accuracy. However, the non-normal nature of the relative free energy distributions underscores the importance of ensemble simulation. We further compare the results with the AM1-BCC charge system and show that it improves agreement with the experimental data by slightly over 10%. This improvement is partly due to AM1-BCC affecting only the charges of the atoms local to the mutation, which translates to even fewer morphed atoms, consequently reducing issues with sampling and therefore ensemble averaging. TIES 20, in conjunction with the enablement of ring morphing, reduces the size of the alchemical region and significantly improves the precision of the predicted free energies.

Fibronectin (FN) is a large glycoprotein which links and transmits signals between the cell's cytoskeleton and the extracellular matrix. FN organization into fibrils and then fibrillogenesis can be induced with the right substrate, such as poly(ethyl acrylate) (PEA), on which FN becomes extended.Interestingly, the almost identical polymer poly(methyl acrylate) (PMA), which has one less methylene bridge (─CH 2 ─), does not cause fibrillogenesis. To investigate the difference in FN behavior on PEA and PMA, the two substrates are modeled using ethyl acrylate (EA) and methyl acrylate (MA) functionalized self-assembled monolayers (SAMs). It is confirmed experimentally that the EA and MA SAMs exhibit a similar behavior in vitro to the polymers in terms of fibronectin fibrillogenesis, domain exposure, and cell adhesion. All-atom molecular dynamics simulations of the FNIII 9-10 domains interacting with each SAM show the adsorption of these two domains on EA SAMs and no adsorption on MA SAMs. Consistently, the experiments show that FN fibrillogenesis takes place on EA SAMs but not on MA SAMs. It is found that the extra methylene group in the EA headgroup leads to more motion within the headgroup that results in a markedly less dense hydration layer, which facilitates FN fibrillogenesis.

We subject a series of five protein–ligand systems which contain important SARS-CoV-2 targets, 3-chymotrypsin-like protease (3CLPro), papain-like protease, and adenosine ribose phosphatase, to long time scale and adaptive sampling molecular dynamics simulations. By performing ensembles of ten or twelve 10 μs simulations for each system, we accurately and reproducibly determine ligand binding sites, both crystallographically resolved and otherwise, thereby discovering binding sites that can be exploited for drug discovery. We also report robust, ensemble-based observation of conformational changes that occur at the main binding site of 3CLPro due to the presence of another ligand at an allosteric binding site explaining the underlying cascade of events responsible for its inhibitory effect. Using our simulations, we have discovered a novel allosteric mechanism of inhibition for a ligand known to bind only at the substrate binding site. Due to the chaotic nature of molecular dynamics trajectories, regardless of their temporal duration individual trajectories do not allow for accurate or reproducible elucidation of macroscopic expectation values. Unprecedentedly at this time scale, we compare the statistical distribution of protein–ligand contact frequencies for these ten/twelve 10 μs trajectories and find that over 90% of trajectories have significantly different contact frequency distributions. Furthermore, using a direct binding free energy calculation protocol, we determine the ligand binding free energies for each of the identified sites using long time scale simulations. The free energies differ by 0.77 to 7.26 kcal/mol across individual trajectories depending on the binding site and the system. We show that, although this is the standard way such quantities are currently reported at long time scale, individual simulations do not yield reliable free energies. Ensembles of independent trajectories are necessary to overcome the aleatoric uncertainty in order to obtain statistically meaningful and reproducible results. Finally, we compare the application of different free energy methods to these systems and discuss their advantages and disadvantages. Our findings here are generally applicable to all molecular dynamics based applications and not confined to the free energy methods used in this study.

Automated free energy calculations for the prediction of binding free energies of congeneric series of ligands to a protein target are growing in popularity, but building reliable initial binding poses for the ligands is challenging. Here, we introduce the open-source FEgrow workflow for building user-defined congeneric series of ligands in protein binding pockets for input to free energy calculations. For a given ligand core and receptor structure, FEgrow enumerates and optimises the bioactive conformations of the grown functional group(s), making use of hybrid machine learning/molecular mechanics potential energy functions where possible. Low energy structures are optionally scored using the gnina convolutional neural network scoring function, and output for more rigorous protein–ligand binding free energy predictions. We illustrate use of the workflow by building and scoring binding poses for ten congeneric series of ligands bound to targets from a standard, high quality dataset of protein–ligand complexes. Furthermore, we build a set of 13 inhibitors of the SARS-CoV-2 main protease from the literature, and use free energy calculations to retrospectively compute their relative binding free energies. FEgrow is freely available at https://github.com/cole-group/FEgrow, along with a tutorial.