The characterization of interactions in protein–ligand complexes is essential for research in structural bioinformatics, drug discovery and biology. However, comprehensive tools are not freely available to the research community. Here, we present the protein–ligand interaction profiler (PLIP), a novel web service for fully automated detection and visualization of relevant non-covalent protein–ligand contacts in 3D structures, freely available at . The input is either a Protein Data Bank structure, a protein or ligand name, or a custom protein–ligand complex (e.g. from docking). In contrast to other tools, the rule-based PLIP algorithm does not require any structure preparation. It returns a list of detected interactions on single atom level, covering seven interaction types (hydrogen bonds, hydrophobic contacts, pi-stacking, pi-cation interactions, salt bridges, water bridges and halogen bonds). PLIP stands out by offering publication-ready images, PyMOL session files to generate custom images and parsable result files to facilitate successive data processing. The full python source code is available for download on the website. PLIP's command-line mode allows for high-throughput interaction profiling.

With the growth of protein structure data, the analysis of molecular interactions between ligands and their target molecules is gaining importance. PLIP, the protein–ligand interaction profiler, detects and visualises these interactions and provides data in formats suitable for further processing. PLIP has proven very successful in applications ranging from the characterisation of docking experiments to the assessment of novel ligand–protein complexes. Besides ligand–protein interactions, interactions with DNA and RNA play a vital role in many applications, such as drugs targeting DNA or RNA-binding proteins. To date, over 7% of all 3D structures in the Protein Data Bank include DNA or RNA. Therefore, we extended PLIP to encompass these important molecules. We demonstrate the power of this extension with examples of a cancer drug binding to a DNA target, and an RNA–protein complex central to a neurological disease. PLIP is available online at https://plip-tool.biotec.tu-dresden.de and as open source code. So far, the engine has served over a million queries and the source code has been downloaded several thousand times.

Drug repositioning applies established drugs to new disease indications with increasing success. A pre-requisite for drug repurposing is drug promiscuity (polypharmacology) – a drug’s ability to bind to several targets. There is a long standing debate on the reasons for drug promiscuity. Based on large compound screens, hydrophobicity and molecular weight have been suggested as key reasons. However, the results are sometimes contradictory and leave space for further analysis. Protein structures offer a structural dimension to explain promiscuity: Can a drug bind multiple targets because the drug is flexible or because the targets are structurally similar or even share similar binding sites? We present a systematic study of drug promiscuity based on structural data of PDB target proteins with a set of 164 promiscuous drugs. We show that there is no correlation between the degree of promiscuity and ligand properties such as hydrophobicity or molecular weight but a weak correlation to conformational flexibility. However, we do find a correlation between promiscuity and structural similarity as well as binding site similarity of protein targets. In particular, 71% of the drugs have at least two targets with similar binding sites. In order to overcome issues in detection of remotely similar binding sites, we employed a score for binding site similarity: LigandRMSD measures the similarity of the aligned ligands and uncovers remote local similarities in proteins. It can be applied to arbitrary structural binding site alignments. Three representative examples, namely the anti-cancer drug methotrexate, the natural product quercetin and the anti-diabetic drug acarbose are discussed in detail. Our findings suggest that global structural and binding site similarity play a more important role to explain the observed drug promiscuity in the PDB than physicochemical drug properties like hydrophobicity or molecular weight. Additionally, we find ligand flexibility to have a minor influence.

Developing a drug de novo is a laborious and costly endeavor. Thus, the repositioning of already approved drugs for the treatment of new diseases is promising and valuable. One computational approach to repositioning exploits the structural similarity of binding sites of known and new targets. Here, we review computational methods to represent and align binding sites. We review available tools, present success stories and discuss limits of the approach.

No abstract