Burcu Ozden, Eda Şamiloğlu, Atakan Özsan, Mehmet Erguven, Can Yükrük, Mehdi Koşaca, Melis Oktayoğlu, Muratcan Menteş, Nazmiye Arslan, Gökhan Karakülah, Ayşe Berçin Barlas, Büşra Savaş, Ezgi Karaca
{"title":"Benchmarking the accuracy of structure-based binding affinity predictors on Spike-ACE2 deep mutational interaction set.","authors":"Burcu Ozden, Eda Şamiloğlu, Atakan Özsan, Mehmet Erguven, Can Yükrük, Mehdi Koşaca, Melis Oktayoğlu, Muratcan Menteş, Nazmiye Arslan, Gökhan Karakülah, Ayşe Berçin Barlas, Büşra Savaş, Ezgi Karaca","doi":"10.1002/prot.26645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the start of COVID-19 pandemic, a huge effort has been devoted to understanding the Spike (SARS-CoV-2)-ACE2 recognition mechanism. To this end, two deep mutational scanning studies traced the impact of all possible mutations across receptor binding domain (RBD) of Spike and catalytic domain of human ACE2. By concentrating on the interface mutations of these experimental data, we benchmarked six commonly used structure-based binding affinity predictors (FoldX, EvoEF1, MutaBind2, SSIPe, HADDOCK, and UEP). These predictors were selected based on their user-friendliness, accessibility, and speed. As a result of our benchmarking efforts, we observed that none of the methods could generate a meaningful correlation with the experimental binding data. The best correlation is achieved by FoldX (R = -0.51). When we simplified the prediction problem to a binary classification, that is, whether a mutation is enriching or depleting the binding, we showed that the highest accuracy is achieved by FoldX with a 64% success rate. Surprisingly, on this set, simple energetic scoring functions performed significantly better than the ones using extra evolutionary-based terms, as in Mutabind and SSIPe. Furthermore, we demonstrated that recent AI approaches, mmCSM-PPI and TopNetTree, yielded comparable performances to the force field-based techniques. These observations suggest plenty of room to improve the binding affinity predictors in guessing the variant-induced binding profile changes of a host-pathogen system, such as Spike-ACE2. To aid such improvements we provide our benchmarking data at https://github.com/CSB-KaracaLab/RBD-ACE2-MutBench with the option to visualize our mutant models at https://rbd-ace2-mutbench.github.io/.</p>","PeriodicalId":56271,"journal":{"name":"Proteins-Structure Function and Bioinformatics","volume":" ","pages":"529-539"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proteins-Structure Function and Bioinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.26645","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Since the start of COVID-19 pandemic, a huge effort has been devoted to understanding the Spike (SARS-CoV-2)-ACE2 recognition mechanism. To this end, two deep mutational scanning studies traced the impact of all possible mutations across receptor binding domain (RBD) of Spike and catalytic domain of human ACE2. By concentrating on the interface mutations of these experimental data, we benchmarked six commonly used structure-based binding affinity predictors (FoldX, EvoEF1, MutaBind2, SSIPe, HADDOCK, and UEP). These predictors were selected based on their user-friendliness, accessibility, and speed. As a result of our benchmarking efforts, we observed that none of the methods could generate a meaningful correlation with the experimental binding data. The best correlation is achieved by FoldX (R = -0.51). When we simplified the prediction problem to a binary classification, that is, whether a mutation is enriching or depleting the binding, we showed that the highest accuracy is achieved by FoldX with a 64% success rate. Surprisingly, on this set, simple energetic scoring functions performed significantly better than the ones using extra evolutionary-based terms, as in Mutabind and SSIPe. Furthermore, we demonstrated that recent AI approaches, mmCSM-PPI and TopNetTree, yielded comparable performances to the force field-based techniques. These observations suggest plenty of room to improve the binding affinity predictors in guessing the variant-induced binding profile changes of a host-pathogen system, such as Spike-ACE2. To aid such improvements we provide our benchmarking data at https://github.com/CSB-KaracaLab/RBD-ACE2-MutBench with the option to visualize our mutant models at https://rbd-ace2-mutbench.github.io/.
期刊介绍:
PROTEINS : Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics publishes original reports of significant experimental and analytic research in all areas of protein research: structure, function, computation, genetics, and design. The journal encourages reports that present new experimental or computational approaches for interpreting and understanding data from biophysical chemistry, structural studies of proteins and macromolecular assemblies, alterations of protein structure and function engineered through techniques of molecular biology and genetics, functional analyses under physiologic conditions, as well as the interactions of proteins with receptors, nucleic acids, or other specific ligands or substrates. Research in protein and peptide biochemistry directed toward synthesizing or characterizing molecules that simulate aspects of the activity of proteins, or that act as inhibitors of protein function, is also within the scope of PROTEINS. In addition to full-length reports, short communications (usually not more than 4 printed pages) and prediction reports are welcome. Reviews are typically by invitation; authors are encouraged to submit proposed topics for consideration.