Table 2.
Mutation | Change of in vitro potency | In silico relative binding free energies (ΔΔG kcal/mol) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1a | 7c | 1a | 1a | 7c | |||
Iteration 1 | Iteration 2 | Iteration 3 | Final model | Final model | |||
F109A3×33 | Loss of function | >2000 fold decreased | −3.14 ± 0.84 | 0.66 ± 2.02 | 1.25 ± 1.03 | 6.52 ± 0.87 | 6.27 ± 0.66 |
H187A5×43 | >34 fold decreased | 138 fold decreased | −3.03 ± 1.04 | −1.26 ± 1.60 | 0.56 ± 1.11 | 2.64 ± 0.93 | 1.72 ± 1.29 |
N271A7×38 | Loss of function | Loss of function | 0.25 ± 0.47 | 4.40 ± 0.54 | 3.73 ± 0.29 | 3.21 ± 0.45 | 2.71 ± 0.34 |
Iterative procedure of model optimization using molecular dynamics and the relative binding free energies obtained by free energy perturbation (FEP) calculations in comparison with in vitro potency as a scoring function. The FEP relative binding free energies that are in agreement with in vitro data are shown in bold.