In 1982, Kuntz et al. published an article with the title “A Geometric Approach to Macromolecule-Ligand Interactions”, where they described a method “to explore geometrically feasible alignment of ligands and receptors of known structure”. Since then, small molecule docking has been employed as a fast way to estimate the binding pose of a given compound within a specific target protein and also to predict binding affinity. Remarkably, the first docking method suggested by Kuntz and colleagues aimed to predict binding poses but very little was specified about binding affinity. This raises the question as to whether docking is the right tool to estimate binding affinity. The short answer is no, and this has been concluded in several comprehensive analyses. However, in this opinion paper we discuss several critical aspects that need to be reconsidered before a reliable binding affinity prediction through docking is realistic. These are not the only issues that need to be considered, but they are perhaps the most critical ones. We also consider that in spite of the huge efforts to enhance scoring functions, the accuracy of binding affinity predictions is perhaps only as good as it was 10–20 years ago. There are several underlying reasons for this poor performance and these are analyzed. In particular, we focus on the role of the solvent (water), the poor description of H-bonding and the lack of the systems’ true dynamics. We hope to provide readers with potential insights and tools to overcome the challenging issues related to binding affinity prediction via docking.

Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations have become increasingly useful in the modern drug development process. In this review, we give a broad overview of the current application possibilities of MD in drug discovery and pharmaceutical development. Starting from the target validation step of the drug development process, we give several examples of how MD studies can give important insights into the dynamics and function of identified drug targets such as sirtuins, RAS proteins, or intrinsically disordered proteins. The role of MD in antibody design is also reviewed. In the lead discovery and lead optimization phases, MD facilitates the evaluation of the binding energetics and kinetics of the ligand-receptor interactions, therefore guiding the choice of the best candidate molecules for further development. The importance of considering the biological lipid bilayer environment in the MD simulations of membrane proteins is also discussed, using G-protein coupled receptors and ion channels as well as the drug-metabolizing cytochrome P450 enzymes as relevant examples. Lastly, we discuss the emerging role of MD simulations in facilitating the pharmaceutical formulation development of drugs and candidate drugs. Specifically, we look at how MD can be used in studying the crystalline and amorphous solids, the stability of amorphous drug or drug-polymer formulations, and drug solubility. Moreover, since nanoparticle drug formulations are of great interest in the field of drug delivery research, different applications of nano-particle simulations are also briefly summarized using multiple recent studies as examples. In the future, the role of MD simulations in facilitating the drug development process is likely to grow substantially with the increasing computer power and advancements in the development of force fields and enhanced MD methodologies.

One of the most common drivers in human cancer is the mutant KRAS protein. Not so long ago KRAS was considered as an undruggable oncoprotein. After a long struggle, however, we finally see some light at the end of the tunnel as promising KRAS targeted therapies are in or approaching clinical trials. In recent years, together with the promising progress in RAS drug discovery, our understanding of KRAS has increased tremendously. This progress has been accompanied with a resurgence of publicly available KRAS structures, which were limited to nine structures less than ten years ago. Furthermore, the ever-increasing computational capacity has made biologically relevant timescales accessible, enabling molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to study the dynamics of KRAS protein in more detail at the atomistic level. In this minireview, my aim is to provide the reader an overview of the publicly available KRAS structural data, insights to conformational dynamics revealed by experiments and what we have learned from MD simulations. Also, I will discuss limitations of the current data and provide suggestions for future research related to KRAS, which would fill out the existing gaps in our knowledge and provide guidance in deciphering this enigmatic oncoprotein.

A mutated KRAS protein is frequently observed in human cancers. Traditionally, the oncogenic properties of KRAS missense mutants at position 12 (G12X) have been considered as equal. Here, by assessing the probabilities of occurrence of all KRAS G12X mutations and KRAS dynamics we show that this assumption does not hold true. Instead, our findings revealed an outstanding mutational bias. We conducted a thorough mutational analysis of KRAS G12X mutations and assessed to what extent the observed mutation frequencies follow a random distribution. Unique tissue-specific frequencies are displayed with specific mutations, especially with G12R, which cannot be explained by random probabilities. To clarify the underlying causes for the nonrandom probabilities, we conducted extensive atomistic molecular dynamics simulations (170 μs) to study the differences of G12X mutations on a molecular level. The simulations revealed an allosteric hydrophobic signaling network in KRAS, and that protein dynamics is altered among the G12X mutants and as such differs from the wild-type and is mutation-specific. The shift in long-timescale conformational dynamics was confirmed with Markov state modeling. A G12X mutation was found to modify KRAS dynamics in an allosteric way, which is especially manifested in the switch regions that are responsible for the effector protein binding. The findings provide a basis to understand better the oncogenic properties of KRAS G12X mutants and the consequences of the observed nonrandom frequencies of specific G12X mutations. The oncogene KRAS is frequently mutated in various cancers. When the amino acid glycine 12 is mutated, KRAS protein acquires oncogenic properties that result in tumor cell-growth and cancer progression. These mutations prevail especially in the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, which is a cancer with an exceptionally dismal prognosis. To date, there is a limited understanding of the different mutations at the position 12, also regarding whether the different mutations would have different consequences. These discrepancies could have major implications for the future drug therapies targeting KRAS mutant harboring tumors. In this study, we made a critical assessment of the observed frequency of KRAS G12X mutations and the underlying causes for these frequencies. We also assessed KRAS G12X mutant discrepancies on an atomistic level by utilizing state-of-the-art molecular dynamics simulations. We found that the dynamics of the mutants does not only differ from the wild-type protein, but there is also a profound difference among the different mutants. These results emphasize that the different KRAS G12X mutations are not equal, and thereby they suggest that the future research related to mutant KRAS biology should account for these observations.