Deep learning (DL) methods in structural modelling are outcompeting force fields because they overcome the two main limitations to force fields methods – the prohibitively large search space for large systems and the limited accuracy of the description of the physics [4].
However, the two methods are also compatible. DL methods are helping to close the gap between the applications of force fields and ab initio methods [3]. The advantage of DL-based force fields is that the functional form does not have to be specified explicitly and much more accurate. Say goodbye to the 12-6 potential function.
In principle DL-based force fields can be applied anywhere where regular force fields have been applied, for example conformation generation [2]. The flip-side of DL-based methods commonly is poor generalization but it seems that force fields, when properly trained, generalize well. ANI trained on molecules with up to 8 heavy atoms is able to generalize to molecules with up to 54 atoms [1]. Excitingly for my research, ANI-2 [2] can replace UFF or MMFF as the energy minimization step for conformation generation in RDKit [5].
So let’s use Auto3D [2] to generated low energy conformations for the four molecules caffeine, Ibuprofen, an experimental hybrid peptide, and Imatinib:
CN1C=NC2=C1C(=O)N(C(=O)N2C)C CFF
CC(C)Cc1ccc(cc1)C(C)C(O)=O IBP
Cc1ccccc1CNC(=O)[C@@H]2C(SCN2C(=O)[C@H]([C@H](Cc3ccccc3)NC(=O)c4cccc(c4C)O)O)(C)C JE2
Cc1ccc(cc1Nc2nccc(n2)c3cccnc3)NC(=O)c4ccc(cc4)CN5CCN(CC5)C STI
CASF-2016 is a commonly used benchmark for docking tools. Unfortunately, some of the provided ligand files cannot be loaded using RDKit (version 2022.09.1) but there is an easy remedy.
Today’s post builds on my earlier blogpost on how to turn a SMILES string into an extended-connectivity fingerprint using RDKit and describes an interesting and easily implementable modification of the extended-connectivity fingerprint (ECFP) featurisation. This modification is based on representing the atoms in the input compound at a different (and potentially more useful) level of abstraction.
We remember that each binary component of an ECFP indicates the presence or absence of a particular circular subgraph in the input compound. Circular subgraphs that are structurally isomorphic are further distinguished according to their inherited atom- and bond features, i.e. two structurally isomorphic circular subgraphs with distinct atom- or bond features correspond to different components of the ECFP. For chemical bonds, this distinction is made on the basis of simple bond types (single, double, triple, or aromatic). To distinguish atoms, standard ECFPs use seven features based on the Daylight atomic invariants [1]; but there is also another less commonly used and often overlooked version of the ECFP that uses pharmacophoric atom features instead [2]. Pharmacophoric atom features attempt to describe atomic properties that are critical for biological activity or binding to a target protein. These features try to capture the potential for important chemical interactions such as hydrogen bonding or ionic bonding. ECFPs that use pharmacophoric atom features instead of standard atom features are called functional-connectivity fingerprints (FCFPs). The exact sets of standard- vs. pharmacophoric atom features for ECFPs vs. FCFPs are listed in the table below.
In RDKit, ECFPs can be changed to FCFPs extremely easily by changing a single input argument. Below you can find a Python/RDKit implementation of a function that turns a SMILES string into an FCFP if use_features = True and into an ECFP if use_features = False.
# import packages
import numpy as np
from rdkit.Chem import AllChem
# define function that transforms a SMILES string into an FCFP if use_features = True and into an ECFP if use_features = False
def FCFP_from_smiles(smiles,
R = 2,
L = 2**10,
use_features = True,
use_chirality = False):
"""
Inputs:
- smiles ... SMILES string of input compound
- R ... maximum radius of circular substructures
- L ... fingerprint-length
- use_features ... if true then use pharmacophoric atom features, if false then use standard DAYLIGHT atom features
- use_chirality ... if true then append tetrahedral chirality flags to atom features
Outputs:
- np.array(feature_list) ... FCFP/ECFP with length L and maximum radius R
"""
molecule = AllChem.MolFromSmiles(smiles)
feature_list = AllChem.GetMorganFingerprintAsBitVect(molecule,
radius = R,
nBits = L,
useFeatures = use_features,
useChirality = use_chirality)
return np.array(feature_list)
The use of pharmacophoric atom features makes FCFPs more specific to molecular interactions that drive biological activity. In certain molecular machine-learning applications, replacing ECFPs with FCFPs can therefore lead to increased performance and decreased learning time, as important high-level atomic properties are presented to the learning algorithm from the start and do not need to be inferred statistically. However, the standard atom features used in ECFPs contain more detailed low-level information that could potentially still be relevant for the prediction task at hand and thus be utilised by the learning algorithm. It is often unclear from the outset whether FCFPs will provide a substantial advantage over ECFPs in a given application; however, given how easy it is to switch between the two, it is almost always worth trying out both options.
[1] Weininger, David, Arthur Weininger, and Joseph L. Weininger. “SMILES. 2. Algorithm for generation of unique SMILES notation.” Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences 29.2 (1989): 97-101.
[2] Rogers, David, and Mathew Hahn. “Extended-connectivity fingerprints.” Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 50.5 (2010): 742-754.
The Astex Diverse set [1] is a dataset containing the crystallized poses of 85 protein-ligand complexes. It was introduced in 2007 to address problems in previous datasets such as incorrect ligand representation.
Loading the 85 ligand files with today’s version of the cheminformatics toolkit RDKit [2] is, however, not as straightforward as you might expect.
ECFPs were originally described in a 2010 article of Rogers and Hahn [1] and still belong to the most popular and efficient methods to turn a molecule into an informative vectorial representation for downstream machine learning tasks. The ECFP-algorithm is dependent on two predefined hyperparameters: the fingerprint-length L and the maximum radius R. An ECFP of length L takes the form of an L-dimensional bitvector containing only 0s and 1s. Each component of an ECFP indicates the presence or absence of a particular circular substructure in the input compound. Each circular substructure has a center atom and a radius that determines its size. The hyperparameter R defines the maximum radius of any circular substructure whose presence or absence is indicated in the ECFP. Circular substructures for a central nitrogen atom in an example compound are depicted in the image below.
When docking, using software like AutoDock Vina, you must prepare your ligand by protonating the molecule, generating 3D coordinates, and converting it to a specific file format (in the case of Vina, PDBQT). Docking software typically needs the protein and ligand file inputs to be written on disk. This is limiting as generating 10,000s of files for a large virtual screen can be annoying and hinder the speed at which you dock.
Fortunately, the Forli group in Scripps Research have developed a Python package, Meeko, to prepare ligands directly from SMILES or other molecule formats for docking to AutoDock 4 or Vina, without writing any files to disk. This means you can dock directly from a single file containing all the SMILES of the ligands you are investigating!
Finding a way to express the similarity of irregular and discrete molecular graphs to enable quantitative algorithmic reasoning in chemical space is a fundamental problem in data-driven small molecule drug discovery.
Virtually all algorithms that are widely and successfully used in this setting boil down to extracting and comparing (multi-)sets of subgraphs, differing only in the space of substructures they consider and the extent to which they are able to adapt to specific downstream applications.
A large body of recent work has explored approaches centred around graph neural networks (GNNs), which can often maximise both of these considerations. However, the subgraph-derived embeddings learned by these algorithms may not always perform well beyond the specific datasets they are trained on and for many generic or resource-constrained applications more traditional “non-parametric” topological fingerprints may still be a viable and often preferable choice .
This blog post gives an overview of the topological fingerprint algorithms implemented in RDKit. In general, they count the occurrences of a certain family of subgraphs in a given molecule and then represent this set/multiset as a bit/count vector, which can be compared to other fingerprints with the Jaccard/Dice similarity metric or further processed by other algorithms.
As a reasonably new RDKit user, I was relieved to find that using its built-in functionality for generating basic images from molecules is quite easy to use. However, over time I have picked up some additional tricks to make the images generated slightly more pleasing on the eye!
The first of these (which I definitely stole from another blog post at some point…) is to ask it to produce SVG images rather than png:
#ensure the molecule visualisation uses svg rather than png format
IPythonConsole.ipython_useSVG=True
Now for something slightly more interesting: as a fragment elaborator, I often need to look at a long list of elaborations that have been made to a starting fragment. As these have usually been docked, these don’t look particularly nice when loaded straight into RDKit and drawn:
#load several mols from a single sdf file using SDMolSupplier
#add these to a list
elabs = [mol for mol in Chem.SDMolSupplier('frag2/elabsTestNoRefine_Docked_0.sdf')]
#get list of ligand efficiencies so these can be displayed alongside the molecules
LEs = [(float(mol.GetProp('Gold.PLP.Fitness'))/mol.GetNumHeavyAtoms()) for mol in elabs]
Draw.MolsToGridImage(elabs, legends = [str(LE) for LE in LEs])
Fig. 1: Images generated without doing any tinkering
Two quick changes that will immediately make this image more useful are aligning the elaborations by a supplied substructure (here I supplied the original fragment so that it’s always in the same place) and calculating the 2D coordinates of the molecules so we don’t see the twisty business happening in the bottom right of Fig. 1:
Molecular descriptors are quantities associated with small molecules that specify physical or chemical properties of interest. They can be used to numerically describe many different aspects of a molecule such as:
molecular graph structure,
lipophilicity (logP),
molecular refractivity,
electrotopological state,
druglikeness,
fragment profile,
molecular charge,
molecular surface,
…
Vectors whose components are molecular descriptors can be used (amongst other things) as high-level feature representations for molecular machine learning. In my experience, molecular descriptor vectors tend to fall slightly short of more low-level molecular representation methods such as extended-connectivity fingerprints or graph neural networks when it comes to predictive performance on large and medium-sized molecular property prediction data sets. However, one advantage of molecular descriptor vectors is their interpretability; there is a reasonable chance that the meaning of a physicochemical descriptor can be intuitively understood by a chemical expert.
A wide variety of useful molecular descriptors can be automatically and easily computed via RDKit purely on the basis of the SMILES string of a molecule. Here is a code snippet to illustrate how this works:
RDKit is very fussy when it comes to inputs in SDF format. Using the SDMolSupplier, we get a significant rate of failure even on curated datasets such as the PDBBind refined set. Pymol has no such scruples, and with that, I present a function which has proved invaluable to me over the course of my DPhil. For reasons I have never bothered to explore, using pymol to convert from sdf, into mol2 and back to sdf format again (adding in missing hydrogens along the way) will almost always make a molecule safe to import using RDKit:
from pathlib import Path
from pymol import cmd
def py_mollify(sdf, overwrite=False):
"""Use pymol to sanitise an SDF file for use in RDKit.
Arguments:
sdf: location of faulty sdf file
overwrite: whether or not to overwrite the original sdf. If False,
a new file will be written in the form <sdf_fname>_pymol.sdf
Returns:
Original sdf filename if overwrite == False, else the filename of the
sanitised output.
"""
sdf = Path(sdf).expanduser().resolve()
mol2_fname = str(sdf).replace('.sdf', '_pymol.mol2')
new_sdf_fname = sdf if overwrite else str(sdf).replace('.sdf', '_pymol.sdf')
cmd.load(str(sdf))
cmd.h_add('all')
cmd.save(mol2_fname)
cmd.reinitialize()
cmd.load(mol2_fname)
cmd.save(str(new_sdf_fname))
return new_sdf_fname
