Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27585474›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2016

SAMPL5: 3D-RISM partition coefficient calculations with partial molar volume corrections and solute conformational sampling.

Tyler Luchko, Nikolay Blinov, Garrett C Limon, Kevin P Joyce, Andriy Kovalenko

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
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 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

Tyler LuchkoDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, California State University, Northridge, Northridge, CA, 91330-8268, USA. tluchko@csun.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6737-6019
Nikolay BlinovNational Institute for Nanotechnology, National Research Council of Canada, 11421 Saskatchewan Dr., Edmonton, AB, T6G 2M9, Canada.
Garrett C LimonDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, California State University, Northridge, Northridge, CA, 91330-8268, USA.
Kevin P JoyceDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, California State University, Northridge, Northridge, CA, 91330-8268, USA.
Andriy KovalenkoNational Institute for Nanotechnology, National Research Council of Canada, 11421 Saskatchewan Dr., Edmonton, AB, T6G 2M9, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implicit solvent methods for classical molecular modeling are frequently used to provide fast, physics-based hydration free energies of macromolecules. Less commonly considered is the transferability of these methods to other solvents. The Statistical Assessment of Modeling of Proteins and Ligands 5 (SAMPL5) distribution coefficient dataset and the accompanying explicit solvent partition coefficient reference calculations provide a direct test of solvent model transferability. Here we use the 3D reference interaction site model (3D-RISM) statistical-mechanical solvation theory, with a well tested water model and a new united atom cyclohexane model, to calculate partition coefficients for the SAMPL5 dataset. The cyclohexane model performed well in training and testing ([Formula: see text] for amino acid neutral side chain analogues) but only if a parameterized solvation free energy correction was used. In contrast, the same protocol, using single solute conformations, performed poorly on the SAMPL5 dataset, obtaining [Formula: see text] compared to the reference partition coefficients, likely due to the much larger solute sizes. Including solute conformational sampling through molecular dynamics coupled with 3D-RISM (MD/3D-RISM) improved agreement with the reference calculation to [Formula: see text]. Since our initial calculations only considered partition coefficients and not distribution coefficients, solute sampling provided little benefit comparing against experiment, where ionized and tautomer states are more important. Applying a simple [Formula: see text] correction improved agreement with experiment from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text], despite a small number of outliers. Better agreement is possible by accounting for tautomers and improving the ionization correction.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationCyclohexanesIsomerismModels, ChemicalMolecular ConformationPharmaceutical PreparationsSolubilitySolventsThermodynamicsWaterCyclohexaneCyclohexanesPharmaceutical PreparationsSolventsWater3D-RISMCyclohexaneMolecular dynamicsMultiple time stepPartial molar volumePartition coefficientSolvent force extrapolationWater

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.