Investigation into mechanism of orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase enzyme by MM-PBSA/MM-GBSA and molecular docking

REFERENCES

• YablonskiMJ, PasekDA, HanBD, JonesME, TrautTW. Intrinsic activity and stability of bifunctional human UMP synthase and its two separate catalytic domains, orotate phosphoribosyltransferase and orotidine-5′-phosphate decarboxylase. J Biol Chem. 1996;271:10704–10708.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• RaugeiS, CascellaM, CarloniP. A proficient enzyme: insights on the mechanism of orotidine monophosphate decarboxylase from computer simulations. J Am Chem Soc. 2004;126:15730–15737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LiebermanI, KornbergA, SimmsES. Enzymatic synthesis of pyrimidine nucleotides: orotidine-5′-phosphate and uridine-5′-phosphate. J Biol Chem. 1955;215:403–451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HoukKN, LeeJK, TantilloDJ, BahmanyarS, HietbrinkBN. Crystal structures of orotidine monophosphate decarboxylase: does the structure reveal the mechanism of nature's most proficient enzyme?. Chembiochem. 2001;2:113–118.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MillerBG, HassellAM, WolfendenR, MilburnMV, ShortSA. Anatomy of a proficient enzyme: the structure of orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase in the presence and absence of a potential transition state analog. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97:2011–2016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ApplebyTC, KinslandC, BegleyTP, EalickSE. The crystal structure and mechanism of orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97:2005–2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeeTS, ChongLT, ChoderaJD, KollmanPA. An alternative explanation for the catalytic proficiency of orotidine 5′-phosphate decarboxylase. J Am Chem Soc. 2001;123:12837–12848.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WoodBM, AmyesTL, FedorovAA, FedorovEV, ShabilaA, AlmoSC, RichardJP, GerltJA. Conformational changes in orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase: ‘remote’ residues that stabilize the active conformation. Biochemistry. 2010;49:3514–3516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RadzickaA, WolfendenR. A proficient enzyme. Science. 1995;267:90–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FershtA. Enzyme structure and mechanism. W.H. Freeman: San Francisco, CA; 1985.
   Google Scholar
• KollmanPA. Free energy calculations: applications to chemical and biochemical phenomena. Chem Rev. 1993;93:2395–2417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BeveridgeDL, DicapuaFM. Free energy via molecular simulations: application to chemical and biochemical system. Ann Rev Biophys Chem. 1989;18:431–492.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• WangJ, MorinP, WangW, KollmanPA. Use of MM-PBSA in reproducing the binding free energies to HIV-1 RT of TIBO derivatives and predicting the binding mode to HIV-1 RT of efavirenz by docking and MM-PBSA. J Am Chem Soc. 2001;123:5221–5230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KollmanPA, MassovaI, ReyesC, KuhnB, HuoS, ChongL, LeeM, LeeT, DuanY, WangW, DoniniO, CieplakP, SrinivasanJ, CaseDA, CheathamTEIII. Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. Acc Chem Res. 2000;33:889–897.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SrinivasanJ, MillerJ, KollmanPA, CaseDA. Continuum solvent studies of stability of RNA hairpin loops and helices. J Biol Struct Dyn. 1998;16:671–682.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MassovaI, KollmanPA. Combined molecular mechanical and continuum solvent approach (MM-PBSA/GBSA) to predict ligand binding. Perspect Drug Discov Des. 2000;18:113–135.
   Google Scholar
• LeeMC, YangR, DuanY. Comparison between Generalized-Born and Poisson–Boltzmann methods in physics-based scoring functions for protein structure prediction. J Mol Model. 2005;12:101–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeeMR, SunY. Improving docking accuracy through molecular mechanics generalized born optimization and scoring. J Chem Theory Comput. 2007;3:1106–1119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HouT, WangJ, LiY, WangW. Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 1. The accuracy of binding free energy calculations based on molecular dynamics simulations. J Chem Inf Model. 2011;51:69–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PolitiA, DurdagiS, Moutevelis-MinakakisP, KokotosG, MavromoustakosT. Development of accurate binding affinity predictions of novel renin inhibitors through molecular docking studies. J Mol Graph Model. 2010;29:425–435.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VerdonkML, BerdiniV, HartshornMJ, MooijWT, MurrayCW, TaylorRD, WatsonP. Virtual screening using protein–ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2004;44:793–806.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• JonesG, WillettP, GlenRC, LeachAR, TaylorR. Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. J Mol Biol. 1997;267:727–748.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LevineHL, BrodyRS, WestheimerFH. Inhibition of orotidine-5′-phosphate decarboxylase by 1-(5′-phospho-beta-d-ribofuranosyl)barbituric acid, 6-azauridine 5′-phosphate, and uridine 5′-phosphate. Biochemistry. 1980;19:4993–4999.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DardenT, YorkD, PedersenL. Particle mesh ewald – an N log(N) method for ewald sums in large systems. J Chem Phys. 1993;98:10089–10092.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AndersenHC. Molecular dynamics simulations at constant pressure and/or temperature. J Chem Phys. 1980;72:2384–2393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CaseDA, CheathamTE, DardenT, GohlkeH, LuoR, MerzKM, OnufrievA, SimmerlingC, WangB, WoodsRJ. The Amber biomolecular simulation programs. J Comput Chem. 2005;26:1668–1688.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RyckaertJP, CiccottiG, BerendsenHJC. Numerical-integration of cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints – molecular-dynamics of N-alkanes. J Comput Phys. 1977;23:327–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SitkoffD, SharpKA, HonigB. Accurate calculation of hydration free-energies using macroscopic solvent models. J Phys Chem. 1994;98:1978–1988.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WangW, KollmanPA. Free energy calculations on dimer stability of the HIV protease using molecular dynamics and a continuum solvent model. J Mol Biol. 2000;303:567–582.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WeiserJ, ShenkinPS, StillWC. Approximate atomic surfaces from linear combinations of pairwise overlaps (LCPO). J Comput Chem. 1999;20:217–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ChongLT, DuanY, WangL, MassovaI, KollmanPA. Molecular dynamics and free-energy calculations applied to affinity maturation in antibody. Proc Natl Acad Soc. 1999;96:14330–14335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TsuiV, CaseDA. Theory and applications of the generalized Born solvation model in macromolecular simulations. Biopolymers. 2000;56:275–291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NissinkJW, MurrayC, HartshornM, VerdonkML, ColeJC, TaylorR. A new test set for validating predictions of protein–ligand interaction. Proteins. 2002;49:457–471.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BrodyRS, WestheimerFH. The purification of orotidine-5′-phosphate decarboxylase from yeast by affinity chromatography. J Biol Chem. 1979;254:4238–4244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PoduchE, WeiL, PaiEF, KotraLP. Structural diversity and plasticity associated with nucleotides targeting orotidine monophosphate decarboxylase. J Med Chem. 2008;51:432–438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BohacekRS, McMartinC. Definition and display of steric, hydrophobic, and hydrogen-bonding properties of ligand binding sites in proteins using Lee and Richards accessible surface: validation of a high-resolution graphical tool for drug design. J Med Chem. 1992;35:1671–1684.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SchiestelT, SchneiderHJ, ZimmermannP. Host–guest supramolecular chemistry. 34. The incremental approach to noncovalent interactions: coulomb and van der Waals effects in organic ion pairs. J Am Chem Sac. 1992;114:7698–7703.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HurS, BruiceTC. Molecular dynamic study of orotidine-5′-monophosphate decarboxylase in ground state and in intermediate state: a role of the 203-218 loop dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99:9668–9673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AmyesTL, MingSA, GoldmanLM, WoodBM, DesaiBJ, GerltJA, RichardJP. Orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase: transition state stabilization from remote protein–phosphodianion interactions. Biochemistry. 2012;23:4630–4632.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IiamsV, DesaiBJ, FedorovAA, FedorovEV, AlmoSC, GerltJA. Mechanism of the orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase-catalyzed reaction: importance of residues in the orotate binding site. Biochemistry. 2011;50:8497–8507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AmyesTL, WoodBM, ChanK, GerltJA, RichardJP. Formation and stability of a vinyl carbanion at the active site of orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase: pKa of the C-6 proton of enzyme-bound UMP. J Am Chem Soc. 2008;130:1574–1575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TsangWY, WoodBM, WongFM, WuW, GerltJA, AmyesTL, RichardJP. Proton transfer from C-6 of uridine 5′-monophosphate catalyzed by orotidine 5′-monophosphate decarboxylase: formation and stability of a vinyl carbanion intermediate and the effect of a 5-fluoro substituent. J Am Chem Soc. 2012;134:14580–14594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar