ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2017
Binding free energies in the SAMPL5 octa-acid host-guest challenge calculated with DFT-D3 and CCSD(T).
Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2017. 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.
- Molecular Modeling Is Key to Understanding Supramolecular Resorcinarenyl Capsules, Inclusion Complex Formation and Organic Reactions in Nanoconfined Space.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Application of molecular dynamic simulations in modeling the excited state behavior of confined molecules.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2023Article
- A General Picture of Cucurbit[8]uril Host-Guest Binding: Recalibrating Bonded Interactions.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Computational Modeling of Supramolecular Metallo-organic Cages-Challenges and Opportunities.ACS catalysis · 2022Review
- A binding mode hypothesis for prothioconazole binding to CYP51 derived from first principles quantum chemistry.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2021Article
- SAMPL7: Host-guest binding prediction by molecular dynamics and quantum mechanics.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2021Article
- Increasing the Potential of the Auristatin Cancer-Drug Family by Shifting the Conformational Equilibrium.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2019Article
- Overview of the SAMPL6 host-guest binding affinity prediction challenge.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2018Article
- SAMPL6 host-guest challenge: binding free energies via a multistep approach.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2018Article
- Binding free energies in the SAMPL6 octa-acid host-guest challenge calculated with MM and QM methods.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2018Article
- Overview of the SAMPL5 host-guest challenge: Are we doing better?Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2017Review
- Binding-affinity predictions of HSP90 in the D3R Grand Challenge 2015 with docking, MM/GBSA, QM/MM, and free-energy simulations.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We have tried to calculate the free energy for the binding of six small ligands to two variants of the octa-acid deep cavitand host in the SAMPL5 blind challenge. We employed structures minimised with dispersion-corrected density-functional theory with small basis sets and energies were calculated using large basis sets. Solvation energies were calculated with continuum methods and thermostatistical corrections were obtained from frequencies calculated at the HF-3c level. Care was taken to minimise the effects of the flexibility of the host by keeping the complexes as symmetric and similar as possible. In some calculations, the large net charge of the host was reduced by removing the propionate and benzoate groups. In addition, the effect of a restricted molecular dynamics sampling of structures was tested. Finally, we tried to improve the energies by using the DLPNO-CCSD(T) approach. Unfortunately, results of quite poor quality were obtained, with no correlation to the experimental data, systematically too positive affinities (by ~50 kJ/mol) and a mean absolute error (after removal of the systematic error) of 11-16 kJ/mol. DLPNO-CCSD(T) did not improve the results, so the accuracy is not limited by the energy function. Instead, four likely sources of errors were identified: first, the minimised structures were often incorrect, owing to the omission of explicit solvent. They could be partly improved by performing the minimisations in a continuum solvent with four water molecules around the charged groups of the ligands. Second, some ligands could bind in several different conformations, requiring sampling of reasonable structures. Third, there is an indication the continuum-solvation model has problems to accurately describe the binding of both the negatively and positively charged guest molecules. Fourth, different methods to calculate the thermostatistical corrections gave results that differed by up to 30 kJ/mol and there is an indication that HF-3c overestimates the entropy term. In conclusion, it is a challenge to calculate binding affinities for this octa-acid system with quantum-mechanical methods.
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.