Structure Modeling of All Identified G Protein–Coupled Receptors in the Human Genome

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs), encoded by about 5% of human genes, comprise the largest family of integral membrane proteins and act as cell surface receptors responsible for the transduction of endogenous signal into a cellular response. Although tertiary structural information is crucial for function annotation and drug design, there are few experimentally determined GPCR structures. To address this issue, we employ the recently developed threading assembly refinement (TASSER) method to generate structure predictions for all 907 putative GPCRs in the human genome. Unlike traditional homology modeling approaches, TASSER modeling does not require solved homologous template structures; moreover, it often refines the structures closer to native. These features are essential for the comprehensive modeling of all human GPCRs when close homologous templates are absent. Based on a benchmarked confidence score, approximately 820 predicted models should have the correct folds. The majority of GPCR models share the characteristic seven-transmembrane helix topology, but 45 ORFs are predicted to have different structures. This is due to GPCR fragments that are predominantly from extracellular or intracellular domains as well as database annotation errors. Our preliminary validation includes the automated modeling of bovine rhodopsin, the only solved GPCR in the Protein Data Bank. With homologous templates excluded, the final model built by TASSER has a global C(α) root-mean-squared deviation from native of 4.6 Å, with a root-mean-squared deviation in the transmembrane helix region of 2.1 Å. Models of several representative GPCRs are compared with mutagenesis and affinity labeling data, and consistent agreement is demonstrated. Structure clustering of the predicted models shows that GPCRs with similar structures tend to belong to a similar functional class even when their sequences are diverse. These results demonstrate the usefulness and robustness of the in silico models for GPCR functional analysis. All predicted GPCR models are freely available for noncommercial users on our Web site (http://www.bioinformatics.buffalo.edu/GPCR)

Advances in GPCR Modeling Evaluated by the GPCR Dock 2013 Assessment: Meeting New Challenges

Despite tremendous successes of GPCR crystallography, the receptors with available structures represent only a small fraction of human GPCRs. An important role of the modeling community is to maximize structural insights for the remaining receptors and complexes. The community-wide GPCR Dock assessment was established to stimulate and monitor the progress in molecular modeling and ligand docking for GPCRs. The four targets in the present third assessment round presented new and diverse challenges for modelers, including prediction of allosteric ligand interaction and activation states in 5-hydroxytryptamine receptors 1B and 2B, and modeling by extremely distant homology for smoothened receptor. Forty-four modeling groups participated in the assessment. State-of-the-art modeling approaches achieved close-to-experimental accuracy for small rigid orthosteric ligands and models built by close homology, and they correctly predicted protein fold for distant homology targets. Predictions of long loops and GPCR activation states remain unsolved problems

Advances in structure and small molecule docking predictions for crystallized G-Protein coupled receptors

This dissertation discusses two main aspects of protein-ligand interaction for G-Protein coupled receptors: structure predictions of the flexible loop domains and docking into these receptors. The prediction of loop structure has been long worked on in the context of native, globular proteins. In this work it is extended to transmembrane proteins, which requires an explicit integration of the lipid bilayer into the loop prediction calculation. In the initial work, this new approach to loop prediction yields highly accurate 3-dimensional structures of the intra and intercellular loops of four G-protein coupled receptors--the A2A adenosine, bovine rhodopsin, β1 and β2 adronergic receptors. For these cases, the loops were predicted in the context of a completely native crystal structure. In subsequent work the approach was extended to work on perturbed cases, where all loops and tails were removed, and side chains near the loop being predicted were in nonnative conformations. Lastly, a full homology model of the β2 adronergic receptor was successfully built from the β1 adronegric receptor as its template. Work on docking into these receptors focuses on the kappa opioid receptor. Known antagonist binders are discriminated from a set of decoy nonbinders via docking calculations. Two new terms were added to the scoring function, WScore to achieve this, based on a detailed molecular understanding of how the receptor works

Ligand-Dependent Conformations and Dynamics of the Serotonin 5-HT2A Receptor Determine Its Activation and Membrane-Driven Oligomerization Properties

From computational simulations of a serotonin 2A receptor (5-HT2AR) model complexed with pharmacologically and structurally diverse ligands we identify different conformational states and dynamics adopted by the receptor bound to the full agonist 5-HT, the partial agonist LSD, and the inverse agonist Ketanserin. The results from the unbiased all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations show that the three ligands affect differently the known GPCR activation elements including the toggle switch at W6.48, the changes in the ionic lock between E6.30 and R3.50 of the DRY motif in TM3, and the dynamics of the NPxxY motif in TM7. The computational results uncover a sequence of steps connecting these experimentally-identified elements of GPCR activation. The differences among the properties of the receptor molecule interacting with the ligands correlate with their distinct pharmacological properties. Combining these results with quantitative analysis of membrane deformation obtained with our new method (Mondal et al, Biophysical Journal 2011), we show that distinct conformational rearrangements produced by the three ligands also elicit different responses in the surrounding membrane. The differential reorganization of the receptor environment is reflected in (i)-the involvement of cholesterol in the activation of the 5-HT2AR, and (ii)-different extents and patterns of membrane deformations. These findings are discussed in the context of their likely functional consequences and a predicted mechanism of ligand-specific GPCR oligomerization

TCRep 3D: An Automated In Silico Approach to Study the Structural Properties of TCR Repertoires

TCRep 3D is an automated systematic approach for TCR-peptide-MHC class I structure prediction, based on homology and ab initio modeling. It has been considerably generalized from former studies to be applicable to large repertoires of TCR. First, the location of the complementary determining regions of the target sequences are automatically identified by a sequence alignment strategy against a database of TCR Vα and Vβ chains. A structure-based alignment ensures automated identification of CDR3 loops. The CDR are then modeled in the environment of the complex, in an ab initio approach based on a simulated annealing protocol. During this step, dihedral restraints are applied to drive the CDR1 and CDR2 loops towards their canonical conformations, described by Al-Lazikani et. al. We developed a new automated algorithm that determines additional restraints to iteratively converge towards TCR conformations making frequent hydrogen bonds with the pMHC. We demonstrated that our approach outperforms popular scoring methods (Anolea, Dope and Modeller) in predicting relevant CDR conformations. Finally, this modeling approach has been successfully applied to experimentally determined sequences of TCR that recognize the NY-ESO-1 cancer testis antigen. This analysis revealed a mechanism of selection of TCR through the presence of a single conserved amino acid in all CDR3β sequences. The important structural modifications predicted in silico and the associated dramatic loss of experimental binding affinity upon mutation of this amino acid show the good correspondence between the predicted structures and their biological activities. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic approach that was developed for large TCR repertoire structural modeling

Structural Prediction of Protein–Protein Interactions by Docking: Application to Biomedical Problems

A huge amount of genetic information is available thanks to the recent advances in sequencing technologies and the larger computational capabilities, but the interpretation of such genetic data at phenotypic level remains elusive. One of the reasons is that proteins are not acting alone, but are specifically interacting with other proteins and biomolecules, forming intricate interaction networks that are essential for the majority of cell processes and pathological conditions. Thus, characterizing such interaction networks is an important step in understanding how information flows from gene to phenotype. Indeed, structural characterization of protein–protein interactions at atomic resolution has many applications in biomedicine, from diagnosis and vaccine design, to drug discovery. However, despite the advances of experimental structural determination, the number of interactions for which there is available structural data is still very small. In this context, a complementary approach is computational modeling of protein interactions by docking, which is usually composed of two major phases: (i) sampling of the possible binding modes between the interacting molecules and (ii) scoring for the identification of the correct orientations. In addition, prediction of interface and hot-spot residues is very useful in order to guide and interpret mutagenesis experiments, as well as to understand functional and mechanistic aspects of the interaction. Computational docking is already being applied to specific biomedical problems within the context of personalized medicine, for instance, helping to interpret pathological mutations involved in protein–protein interactions, or providing modeled structural data for drug discovery targeting protein–protein interactions.Spanish Ministry of Economy grant number BIO2016-79960-R; D.B.B. is supported by a predoctoral fellowship from CONACyT; M.R. is supported by an FPI fellowship from the Severo Ochoa program. We are grateful to the Joint BSC-CRG-IRB Programme in Computational Biology.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft