Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2025

Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship, Activity Prediction, and Molecular Dynamics of Non-nucleotide Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors
Published on: May 9, 2025
Computational Workflow for Refining AlphaFold Models in Drug Design Using Kinetic and Thermodynamic Binding
Margarita Stampelou1, Graham Ladds2, Antonios Kolocouris1
1Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece.
Abstract:
A structure-based drug design pipeline that considers both thermodynamic and kinetic binding data of ligands against a receptor will enable the computational design of improved drug molecules. For unresolved GPCR-ligand complexes, a workflow that can apply both thermodynamic and kinetic binding data in combination with alpha-fold (AF)-derived or other homology models and experimentally resolved binding modes of relevant ligands in GPCR-homologs needs to be tested. Here, as test case, we studied a congeneric set of ligands that bind to a structurally unresolved G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), the inactive human adenosine A3 receptor (hA3R). We tested three available homology models from which two have been generated from experimental structures of hA1R or hA2AR and one model was a multistate alphafold 2 (AF2)-derived model. We applied alchemical calculations with thermodynamic integration coupled with molecular dynamics (TI/MD) simulations to calculate the experimental relative binding free energies and residence time (τ)-random accelerated MD (τ-RAMD) simulations to calculate the relative residence times (RTs) for antagonists. While the TI/MD calculations produced, for the three homology models, good Pearson correlation coefficients, correspondingly, r = 0.74, 0.62, and 0.67 and mean unsigned error (mue) values of 0.94, 1.31, and 0.81 kcal mol-1, the τ-RAMD method showed r = 0.92 and 0.52 for the first two models but failed to produce accurate results for the multistate AF2-derived model. With subsequent optimization of the AF2-derived model by reorientation of the side chain of R1735.34 located in the extracellular loop 2 (EL2) that blocked ligand's unbinding, the computational model showed r = 0.84 for kinetic data and improved performance for thermodynamic data (r = 0.81, mue = 0.56 kcal mol-1). Overall, after refining the multistate AF2 model with physics-based tools, we were able to show a strong correlation between predicted and experimental ligand relative residence times and affinities, achieving a level of accuracy comparable to an experimental structure. The computational workflow used can be applied to other receptors, helping to rank candidate drugs in a congeneric series and enabling the prioritization of leads with stronger binding affinities and longer residence times.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Adrenergic Agonists: Chemistry and Structure-Activity Relationship
Aromatic ring substitutions: Substituting the aromatic ring with –OH groups at positions 3 and 4 yields catecholamines (e.g., epinephrine), which have a high affinity for adrenoceptors. Hydrogen bonding between –OH groups and receptors enhances adrenergic activity.
Separation of...
The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength
Structure-Activity Relationships and Drug Design
SAR studies the intricate relationship between a drug's chemical structure and biological activity. It focuses on understanding how modifications to a drug's structure can influence...
Physiological Pharmacokinetic Models: Assumption with Protein Binding
Adrenergic Antagonists: Chemistry and Classification of ɑ-Receptor Blockers
Nonselective α-blockers: Nonselective α-blockers contain haloalkylamine or imidazoline...
Quantitative Aspects of Drug-Receptor Interaction

