Evaluations of the Absolute and Relative Free Energies for Antidepressant Binding to the Amino Acid Membrane Transporter LeuT with Free Energy Simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The binding of ligands to protein receptors with high affinity and specificity is central to many cellular processes. The quest for the development of computational models capable of accurately evaluating binding affinity remains one of the main goals of modern computational biophysics. In this work, free energy perturbation/molecular dynamics simulations were used to evaluate absolute and relative binding affinity for three different antidepressants to a sodium-dependent membrane transporter, LeuT, a bacterial homologue of human serotonin and dopamine transporters. Dysfunction of these membrane transporters in mammals has been implicated in multiple diseases of the nervous system, including bipolar disorder and depression. Furthermore, these proteins are key targets for antidepressants including fluoxetine (aka Prozac) and tricyclic antidepressants known to block transport activity. In addition to being clinically relevant, this system, where multiple crystal structures are readily available, represents an ideal testing ground for methods used to study the molecular mechanisms of ligand binding to membrane proteins. We discuss possible pitfalls and different levels of approximation required to evaluate binding affinity, such as the dependence of the computed affinities on the strength of constraints and the sensitivity of the computed affinities to the particular partial charges derived from restrained electrostatic potential fitting of quantum mechanics electrostatic potential. Finally, we compare the effects of different constraint schemes on the absolute and relative binding affinities obtained from free energy simulations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".