ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2009
Scoring ensembles of docked protein:ligand interactions for virtual lead optimization.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Empirical Scoring Functions for Structure-Based Virtual Screening: Applications, Critical Aspects, and Challenges.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2018Review
- PL-PatchSurfer2: Improved Local Surface Matching-Based Virtual Screening Method That Is Tolerant to Target and Ligand Structure Variation.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2016Article
- A Multi-scale Computational Platform to Mechanistically Assess the Effect of Genetic Variation on Drug Responses in Human Erythrocyte Metabolism.PLoS computational biology · 2016Article
- Knowledge-Based Methods To Train and Optimize Virtual Screening Ensembles.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2016Article
- Implicit ligand theory: rigorous binding free energies and thermodynamic expectations from molecular docking.The Journal of chemical physics · 2012Article
- Rational prediction with molecular dynamics for hit identification.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2012Review
- Structure-based functional design of drugs: from target to lead compound.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2012Article
- Molecular-level simulation of pandemic influenza glycoproteins.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2012Article
- Multiple-targeting and conformational selection in the estrogen receptor: computation and experiment.Chemical biology & drug design · 2011Article
- VoteDock: consensus docking method for prediction of protein-ligand interactions.Journal of computational chemistry · 2011Article
- Computer-aided drug design platform using PyMOL.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ensembles of protein structures to simulate protein flexibility are widely used throughout several applications including virtual lead optimization where they have been shown to improve ligand ranking. Yet, there is no established convention for weighting individual scores generated from ensemble members. To investigate the best method for weighting ensemble scores for proper ligand ranking, a series of dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors was docked to ensembles of Candida albicans dihydrofolate reductase (CaDHFR) structures created from a molecular dynamics (MD) simulation. From a single MD simulation, two ensemble collections were generated, one of which was subjected to a minimization procedure to create a group of structures of equal probability. As expected, ligand ranking accuracy was significantly improved when Boltzmann weighting was applied to the energies of the ensemble without structural minimization (60%), relative to that achieved with averaging (36%). However, accuracy was further improved (72%) by averaging docking scores across a minimized ensemble. To examine whether this accuracy results from structural variation in the single trajectory versus the possibility that error is minimized by averaging, a third collection of receptor structures was created in which each member was taken from an independent molecular dynamics simulation after minimization. Comparison of the docking accuracy results from the single trajectory (72%) to this third collection (61%) showed decreased accuracy, suggesting that ligands are more accurately oriented and assessed when docked to the minimized ensemble from a single MD trajectory, an effect that is more than simply error minimization. Averaging docking scores over a minimized ensemble of another target, influenza A neuraminidase, yielded a ligand ranking accuracy of 83%, representing a 24% improvement over other methods tested.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.