Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19569204›Full record

ArticleJournal of computational chemistry2010

Ligand and structure-based models for the prediction of ligand-receptor affinities and virtual screenings: Development and application to the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor.

Santiago Vilar, Joel Karpiak, Stefano Costanzi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computational chemistry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. How Open Data Shapes In Silico Transporter Modeling.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017
    Review
  3. CombinatorialFrontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2017
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Homology modeling of class a G protein-coupled receptors.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2012
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Drug-drug interaction through molecular structure similarity analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Santiago VilarLaboratory of Biological Modeling, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, DHHS, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.
Joel Karpiak
Stefano Costanzi

Funding

Molecular modeling of G protein-coupled receptorsZIADK013025 · NIDDK · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES · PI SHERMAN, ARTHUR · 2009 to 2012
$1.2M
Molecular modeling of G protein-coupled receptorsZ01DK013025 · NIDDK · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES · PI SHERMAN, ARTHUR · 2007 to 2008
$742k
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 DK013025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the applicability of ligand-based and structure-based models to quantitative affinity predictions and virtual screenings for ligands of the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor, a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR). We also devised and evaluated a number of consensus models obtained through partial least square regressions, to combine the strengths of the individual components. In all cases, the bioactive conformation of each ligand was derived from molecular docking at the crystal structure of the receptor. We identified the most effective models applicable to the different scenarios, in the presence or in the absence of a training set. For ranking the affinity of closely related analogs when a training set is available, a ligand-based consensus model (LI-CM) seems to be the best choice, while the structure-based MM-GBSA score seems the best alternative in the absence of a training set. For virtual screening purposes, the structure-based MM-GBSA score was found to be the method of choice. Consensus models consistently had performances superior or close to those of the best individual components, and were endowed with a significantly increased robustness. Given multiple models with no a priori knowledge of their predictive capabilities, constructing a consensus model ensures results very close to those that the best model alone would have yielded.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AntagonistsBinding SitesCrystallography, X-RayDiscriminant AnalysisLigandsModels, MolecularMolecular Dynamics SimulationMolecular StructureQuantitative Structure-Activity RelationshipReceptors, Adrenergic, beta-2Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AntagonistsLigandsReceptors, Adrenergic, beta-2

Identifiers

PMID19569204
PMCPMC2818076

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.