Community-wide assessment of GPCR structure modelling and ligand docking: GPCR Dock 2008

Recent breakthroughs in the determination of the crystal structures of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have provided new opportunities for structure-based drug design strategies targeting this protein family. With the aim of evaluating the current status of GPCR structure prediction and ligand docking, a community-wide, blind prediction assessment - GPCR Dock 2008 - was conducted in coordination with the publication of the crystal structure of the human adenosine A2Areceptor bound to the ligand ZM241385. Twenty-nine groups submitted 206 structural models before the release of the experimental structure, which were evaluated for the accuracy of the ligand binding mode and the overall receptor model compared with the crystal structure. This analysis highlights important aspects for success and future development, such as accurate modelling of structurally divergent regions and use of additional biochemical insight such as disulphide bridges in the extracellular loops

Prediction of protein assemblies, the next frontier: The CASP14-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 50, the fourth joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of twelve targets, including six dimers, three trimers, and three higher-order oligomers. Four of these were easy targets, for which good structural templates were available either for the full assembly, or for the main interfaces (of the higher-order oligomers). Eight were difficult targets for which only distantly related templates were found for the individual subunits. Twenty-five CAPRI groups including eight automatic servers submitted ~1250 models per target. Twenty groups including six servers participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge submitted ~190 models per target. The accuracy of the predicted models was evaluated using the classical CAPRI criteria. The prediction performance was measured by a weighted scoring scheme that takes into account the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group as part of their five top-ranking models. Compared to the previous CASP-CAPRI challenge, top performing groups submitted such models for a larger fraction (70–75%) of the targets in this Round, but fewer of these models were of high accuracy. Scorer groups achieved stronger performance with more groups submitting correct models for 70–80% of the targets or achieving high accuracy predictions. Servers performed less well in general, except for the MDOCKPP and LZERD servers, who performed on par with human groups. In addition to these results, major advances in methodology are discussed, providing an informative overview of where the prediction of protein assemblies currently stands.Cancer Research UK, Grant/Award Number: FC001003; Changzhou Science and Technology Bureau, Grant/Award Number: CE20200503; Department of Energy and Climate Change, Grant/Award Numbers: DE-AR001213, DE-SC0020400, DE-SC0021303; H2020 European Institute of Innovation and Technology, Grant/Award Numbers: 675728, 777536, 823830; Institut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA), Grant/Award Number: Cordi-S; Lietuvos Mokslo Taryba, Grant/Award Numbers: S-MIP-17-60, S-MIP-21-35; Medical Research Council, Grant/Award Number: FC001003; Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI, Grant/Award Number: JP19J00950; Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Grant/Award Number: PID2019-110167RB-I00; Narodowe Centrum Nauki, Grant/Award Numbers: UMO-2017/25/B/ST4/01026, UMO-2017/26/M/ST4/00044, UMO-2017/27/B/ST4/00926; National Institute of General Medical Sciences, Grant/Award Numbers: R21GM127952, R35GM118078, RM1135136, T32GM132024; National Institutes of Health, Grant/Award Numbers: R01GM074255, R01GM078221, R01GM093123, R01GM109980, R01GM133840, R01GN123055, R01HL142301, R35GM124952, R35GM136409; National Natural Science Foundation of China, Grant/Award Number: 81603152; National Science Foundation, Grant/Award Numbers: AF1645512, CCF1943008, CMMI1825941, DBI1759277, DBI1759934, DBI1917263, DBI20036350, IIS1763246, MCB1925643; NWO, Grant/Award Number: TOP-PUNT 718.015.001; Wellcome Trust, Grant/Award Number: FC00100

Community-Wide Assessment of Protein-Interface Modeling Suggests Improvements to Design Methodology

The CAPRI and CASP prediction experiments have demonstrated the power of community wide tests of methodology in assessing the current state of the art and spurring progress in the very challenging areas of protein docking and structure prediction. We sought to bring the power of community wide experiments to bear on a very challenging protein design problem that provides a complementary but equally fundamental test of current understanding of protein-binding thermodynamics. We have generated a number of designed protein-protein interfaces with very favorable computed binding energies but which do not appear to be formed in experiments, suggesting there may be important physical chemistry missing in the energy calculations. 28 research groups took up the challenge of determining what is missing: we provided structures of 87 designed complexes and 120 naturally occurring complexes and asked participants to identify energetic contributions and/or structural features that distinguish between the two sets. The community found that electrostatics and solvation terms partially distinguish the designs from the natural complexes, largely due to the non-polar character of the designed interactions. Beyond this polarity difference, the community found that the designed binding surfaces were on average structurally less embedded in the designed monomers, suggesting that backbone conformational rigidity at the designed surface is important for realization of the designed function. These results can be used to improve computational design strategies, but there is still much to be learned; for example, one designed complex, which does form in experiments, was classified by all metrics as a non-binder

Impact of AlphaFold on structure prediction of protein complexes: The CASP15-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 54, the 5th joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round offered 37 targets, including 14 homodimers, 3 homo-trimers, 13 heterodimers including 3 antibody-antigen complexes, and 7 large assemblies. On average ~70 CASP and CAPRI predictor groups, including more than 20 automatics servers, submitted models for each target. A total of 21 941 models submitted by these groups and by 15 CAPRI scorer groups were evaluated using the CAPRI model quality measures and the DockQ score consolidating these measures. The prediction performance was quantified by a weighted score based on the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group among their five best models. Results show substantial progress achieved across a significant fraction of the 60+ participating groups. High-quality models were produced for about 40% of the targets compared to 8% two years earlier. This remarkable improvement is due to the wide use of the AlphaFold2 and AlphaFold2-Multimer software and the confidence metrics they provide. Notably, expanded sampling of candidate solutions by manipulating these deep learning inference engines, enriching multiple sequence alignments, or integration of advanced modeling tools, enabled top performing groups to exceed the performance of a standard AlphaFold2-Multimer version used as a yard stick. This notwithstanding, performance remained poor for complexes with antibodies and nanobodies, where evolutionary relationships between the binding partners are lacking, and for complexes featuring conformational flexibility, clearly indicating that the prediction of protein complexes remains a challenging problem

Impact of AlphaFold on Structure Prediction of Protein Complexes: The CASP15-CAPRI Experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 54, the 5th joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round offered 37 targets, including 14 homo-dimers, 3 homo-trimers, 13 hetero-dimers including 3 antibody-antigen complexes, and 7 large assemblies. On average ~70 CASP and CAPRI predictor groups, including more than 20 automatics servers, submitted models for each target. A total of 21941 models submitted by these groups and by 15 CAPRI scorer groups were evaluated using the CAPRI model quality measures and the DockQ score consolidating these measures. The prediction performance was quantified by a weighted score based on the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group among their 5 best models. Results show substantial progress achieved across a significant fraction of the 60+ participating groups. High-quality models were produced for about 40% for the targets compared to 8% two years earlier, a remarkable improvement resulting from the wide use of the AlphaFold2 and AlphaFold-Multimer software. Creative use was made of the deep learning inference engines affording the sampling of a much larger number of models and enriching the multiple sequence alignments with sequences from various sources. Wide use was also made of the AlphaFold confidence metrics to rank models, permitting top performing groups to exceed the results of the public AlphaFold-Multimer version used as a yard stick. This notwithstanding, performance remained poor for complexes with antibodies and nanobodies, where evolutionary relationships between the binding partners are lacking, and for complexes featuring conformational flexibility, clearly indicating that the prediction of protein complexes remains a challenging problem