Eleven popular scoring functions have been tested on 100 protein-ligand complexes to evaluate their abilities to reproduce experimentally determined structures and binding affinities. They include four scoring functions implemented in the LigFit module in Cerius2 (LigScore, PLP, PMF, and LUDI), four scoring functions implemented in the CScore module in SYBYL (F-Score, G-Score, D-Score, and ChemScore), the scoring function implemented in the AutoDock program, and two stand-alone scoring functions (DrugScore and X-Score). These scoring functions are not tested in the context of a particular docking program. Instead, conformational sampling and scoring are separated into two consecutive steps. First, an exhaustive conformational sampling is performed by using the AutoDock program to generate an ensemble of docked conformations for each ligand molecule. This conformational ensemble is required to cover the entire conformational space as much as possible rather than to focus on a few energy minima. Then, each scoring function is applied to score this conformational ensemble to see if it can identify the experimentally observed conformation from all of the other decoys. Among all of the scoring functions under test, six of them, i.e., PLP, F-Score, LigScore, DrugScore, LUDI, and X-Score, yield success rates higher than the AutoDock scoring function. The success rates of these six scoring functions range from 66% to 76% if using root-mean-square deviation < or =2.0 A as the criterion. Combining any two or three of these six scoring functions into a consensus scoring scheme further improves the success rate to nearly 80% or even higher. However, when applied to reproduce the experimentally determined binding affinities of the 100 protein-ligand complexes, only X-Score, PLP, DrugScore, and G-Score are able to give correlation coefficients over 0.50. All of the 11 scoring functions are further inspected by their abilities to construct a descriptive, funnel-shaped energy surface for protein-ligand complexation. The results indicate that X-Score and DrugScore perform better than the other ones at this aspect.

Men who develop metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) invariably succumb to the disease. The development and progression to CRPC following androgen ablation therapy is predominantly driven by unregulated androgen receptor (AR) signaling1-3. Despite the success of recently approved therapies targeting AR signaling such as abiraterone4-6 and second generation anti-androgens MDV3100 (enzalutamide)7,8, durable responses are limited, presumably due to acquired resistance. Recently JQ1 and I-BET, two selective small molecule inhibitors that target the amino-terminal bromodomains of BRD4, have been shown to exhibit anti-proliferative effects in a range of malignancies9-12. Here we show that AR signaling-competent CRPC cell lines are preferentially sensitive to BET bromodomain inhibition. BRD4 physically interacts with the N-terminal domain of AR and can be disrupted by JQ111,13. Like the direct AR antagonist, MDV3100, JQ1 disrupted AR recruitment to target gene loci. In contrast to MDV3100, JQ1 functions downstream of AR, and more potently abrogated BRD4 localization to AR target loci and AR-mediated gene transcription including induction of TMPRSS2-ERG and its oncogenic activity. In vivo, BET bromodomain inhibition was more efficacious than direct AR antagonism in CRPC xenograft models. Taken together, these studies provide a novel epigenetic approach for the concerted blockade of oncogenic drivers in advanced prostate cancer.

We have screened the entire Protein Data Bank (Release No. 103, January 2003) and identified 5671 protein-ligand complexes out of 19 621 experimental structures. A systematic examination of the primary references of these entries has led to a collection of binding affinity data (K(d), K(i), and IC(50)) for a total of 1359 complexes. The outcomes of this project have been organized into a Web-accessible database named the PDBbind database.

We have developed the PDBbind database to provide a comprehensive collection of binding affinities for the protein-ligand complexes in the Protein Data Bank (PDB). This paper gives a full description of the latest version, i.e., version 2003, which is an update to our recently reported work. Out of 23 790 entries in the PDB release No.107 (January 2004), 5897 entries were identified as protein-ligand complexes that meet our definition. Experimentally determined binding affinities (K(d), K(i), and IC(50)) for 1622 of these were retrieved from the references associated with these complexes. A total of 900 complexes were selected to form a "refined set", which is of particular value as a standard data set for docking and scoring studies. All of the final data, including binding affinity data, reference citations, and processed structural files, have been incorporated into the PDBbind database accessible on-line at http:// www.pdbbind.org/.

SUMMARY To characterize patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) for functional studies, we made whole-genome comparisons with originating breast cancers representative of the major intrinsic subtypes. Structural and copy number aberrations were found to be retained with high fidelity. However, at the single-nucleotide level, variable numbers of PDX-specific somatic events were documented, although they were only rarely functionally significant. Variant allele frequencies were often preserved in the PDXs, demonstrating that clonal representation can be transplantable. Estrogen-receptor-positive PDXs were associated with ESR1 ligand-binding-domain mutations, gene amplification, or an ESR1/YAP1 translocation. These events produced different endocrine-therapy-response phenotypes in human, cell line, and PDX endocrine-response studies. Hence, deeply sequenced PDX models are an important resource for the search for genome-forward treatment options and capture endocrine-drug-resistance etiologies that are not observed in standard cell lines. The originating tumor genome provides a benchmark for assessing genetic drift and clonal representation after transplantation.