Search for: All records

The CACHE challenges are a series of prospective benchmarking exercises to evaluate progress in the field of computational hit-finding. Here we report the results of the inaugural CACHE challenge in which 23 computational teams each selected up to 100 commercially available compounds that they predicted would bind to the WDR domain of the Parkinson’s disease target LRRK2, a domain with no known ligand and only an apo structure in the PDB. The lack of known binding data and presumably low druggability of the target is a challenge to computational hit finding methods. Of the 1955 molecules predicted by participants in Round 1 of the challenge, 73 were found to bind to LRRK2 in an SPR assay with a KD lower than 150 μM. These 73 molecules were advanced to the Round 2 hit expansion phase, where computational teams each selected up to 50 analogs. Binding was observed in two orthogonal assays for seven chemically diverse series, with affinities ranging from 18 to 140 μM. The seven successful computational workflows varied in their screening strategies and techniques. Three used molecular dynamics to produce a conformational ensemble of the targeted site, three included a fragment docking step, three implemented a generative design strategy and five used one or more deep learning steps. CACHE #1 reflects a highly exploratory phase in computational drug design where participants adopted strikingly diverging screening strategies. Machine learning-accelerated methods achieved similar results to brute force (e.g., exhaustive) docking. First-in-class, experimentally confirmed compounds were rare and weakly potent, indicating that recent advances are not sufficient to effectively address challenging targets. 

Abstract In the ligand prediction category of CASP15, the challenge was to predict the positions and conformations of small molecules binding to proteins that were provided as amino acid sequences or as models generated by the AlphaFold2 program. For most targets, we used our template‐based ligand docking program ClusPro ligTBM, also implemented as a public server available athttps://ligtbm.cluspro.org/. Since many targets had multiple chains and a number of ligands, several templates, and some manual interventions were required. In a few cases, no templates were found, and we had to use direct docking using the Glide program. Nevertheless, ligTBM was shown to be a very useful tool, and by any ranking criteria, our group was ranked among the top five best‐performing teams. In fact, all the best groups used template‐based docking methods. Thus, it appears that the AlphaFold2‐generated models, despite the high accuracy of the predicted backbone, have local differences from the x‐ray structure that make the use of direct docking methods more challenging. The results of CASP15 confirm that this limitation can be frequently overcome by homology‐based docking.