Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26860112›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2016

Extrapolative prediction using physically-based QSAR.

Ann E Cleves, Ajay N Jain

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Ann E ClevesHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Ajay N JainDepartment of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. ajain@jainlab.org.

Funding

Binding-Site Modeling with Multiple-Instance Machine-LearningR01GM101689 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI JAIN, AJAY N · 2013 to 2020
$2.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM101689NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM101689
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surflex-QMOD integrates chemical structure and activity data to produce physically-realistic models for binding affinity prediction . Here, we apply QMOD to a 3D-QSAR benchmark dataset and show broad applicability to a diverse set of targets. Testing new ligands within the QMOD model employs automated flexible molecular alignment, with the model itself defining the optimal pose for each ligand. QMOD performance was compared to that of four approaches that depended on manual alignments (CoMFA, two variations of CoMSIA, and CMF). QMOD showed comparable performance to the other methods on a challenging, but structurally limited, test set. The QMOD models were also applied to test a large and structurally diverse dataset of ligands from ChEMBL, nearly all of which were synthesized years after those used for model construction. Extrapolation across diverse chemical structures was possible because the method addresses the ligand pose problem and provides structural and geometric means to quantitatively identify ligands within a model's applicability domain. Predictions for such ligands for the four tested targets were highly statistically significant based on rank correlation. Those molecules predicted to be highly active (pK(i) ≥ 7.5) had a mean experimental pK(i) of 7.5, with potent and structurally novel ligands being identified by QMOD for each target.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularMolecular ConformationQuantitative Structure-Activity RelationshipBinding SitesLigandsLigandsAffinity predictionBinding mode predictionExtrapolationQMODQSARSurflex

Identifiers

PMID26860112
PMCPMC4796382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.