Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of six upgraded empirical force fields were compared and evaluated with short peptides, intrinsically disordered proteins, and folded proteins using trajectories of 1, 1.5, 5, or 10 μs (five replicates of 200 ns, 300 ns, 1 μs, or 2 μs) for each system. Previous studies have shown that different force fields, water models, simulation methods, and parameters can affect simulation outcomes. Here, the MD simulations were done in an explicit solvent with RS-peptide, HEWL19, HIV-rev, β amyloid (Aβ)-40, Aβ-42, phosphodiesteraseγ, CspTm, and ubiquitin using ff 99IDPs, ff14IDPs, ff14IDPSFF, ff03w, CHARMM36m, and CHARMM22* force fields. The IDP ensembles generated by six all-atom empirical force fields were compared against NMR data. Despite using identical starting structures and simulation parameters, ensembles obtained with different force fields exhibit significant differences in NMR RMDs, secondary structure contents, and global properties such as the radius of gyration. The intrinsically disordered protein (IDP)-specific force fields could substantially reproduce the experimental observables in force field comparison: they have the lowest error in chemical shifts and J-couplings for short peptides/proteins, reasonably well for large IDPs and reasonably well with the radius of gyration. A high population of disorderness was observed in the IDP-specific force field for the IDP ensemble with a fraction of β sheets for β-amyloids. CHARMM22* performs better for many observables; however, it still has a preference toward the helicity for short peptides. The results of β-amyloid 42 starting from two different initial structures (Aβ42 1Z0Q and Aβ42 model ) were also compared with DSSP and NMR data. The results obtained with IDP-specific force fields within 2 μs simulation time are similar, even though starting from different structures. The current force fields perform equally well for folded proteins. The results of currently developed or modified force fields for IDPs are capable of enlightening the overall performance of the force field for disordered as well as folded proteins, thereby contributing to force field development.

Role of Shp2: The dysregulation of cell signaling cascades associated with the cell differentiation and growth, due to the deletion, insertion or point mutation in specific amino acids which alters the intrinsic conformation of the protein, can ultimately lead to a fatal cancer disease. The protein tyrosine phosphatase has been recognized as a key regulator of extracellular stimuli such as cytokine receptor and receptor tyrosine kinase signaling. In the last era, the PTPN11 gene (encode a Shp2 protein) and its association with acute myeloid, juvenile myelomonocytic, and B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Noonan syndrome, and myelodysplastic have been recognized as the cause of such deadly disease due to the occurrence of germline mutations in the interface of PTP and SH2 domain. Conclusion: The current study was designed to focus on the allosteric regulation (autoinhibition) of the of Shp2 protein. Subsequently, it will cover the last 10-year recap of Shp2 protein, their role in cancer, and regulation in numerous ways (allosteric regulation).

Juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML) is an invasive myeloproliferative neoplasm and is a childhood disease with very high clinical lethality. The SHP2 is encoded by the PTPN11 gene, which is a nonreceptor (pY)-phosphatase and mutation causes JMML. The structural hierarchy of SHP2 includes protein tyrosine phosphatase domain (PTP) and Src-homology 2 domain (N-SH2 and C-SH2). Somatic mutation (E76Q) in the interface of SH2-PTP domain is the most commonly identified mutation found in up to 35% of patients with JMML. The mechanism of this mutant associated with JMML is poorly understood. Here, molecular dynamics simulation was performed on wild-type and mutant (E76Q) of SHP2 to explore the precise impact of gain-of-function on PTP’s activity. Consequently, such impact rescues the SHP2 protein from autoinhibition state through losing the interface interactions of Q256/F7 and S502/Q76 or weakening interactions of Q256/R4, Q510/G60, and Q506/A72 between N-SH2 and PTP domains. The consequences of these interactions further relieve the D′E loop away from the PTP catalytic site. The following study would provide a mechanistic insight for better understanding of how individual SHP2 mutations alter the PTP’s activity at the atomic level.