Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28399632›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of biophysics2017

Predicting Binding Free Energies: Frontiers and Benchmarks.

David L Mobley, Michael K Gilson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of biophysics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 175 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
175citing 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

175 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Molecular Quantum Computations on a Protein.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. How to Use Quantum Computers for Biomolecular Free Energies.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. AI-Driven De Novo Binder Design: From Structure Prediction to Closed-Loop Optimization.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026
    Review
  20. Article

115 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

David L MobleyDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Department of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine, California 92697; email: dmobley@mobleylab.org.
Michael K GilsonSkaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences and Center for Drug Discovery Innovation, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093; email: mgilson@ucsd.edu.

Funding

THEORY AND MODELING OF NONCOVALENT BINDINGR01GM061300 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MD BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE · PI GILSON, MICHAEL K. · 2000 to 2021
$7.2M
Computational alchemy for molecular design and optimizationR01GM108889 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI MOBLEY, DAVID LOWELL · 2014 to 2022
$2.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM061300NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM108889
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Binding free energy calculations based on molecular simulations provide predicted affinities for biomolecular complexes. These calculations begin with a detailed description of a system, including its chemical composition and the interactions among its components. Simulations of the system are then used to compute thermodynamic information, such as binding affinities. Because of their promise for guiding molecular design, these calculations have recently begun to see widespread applications in early-stage drug discovery. However, many hurdles remain in making them a robust and reliable tool. In this review, we highlight key challenges of these calculations, discuss some examples of these challenges, and call for the designation of standard community benchmark test systems that will help the research community generate and evaluate progress. In our view, progress will require careful assessment and evaluation of new methods, force fields, and modeling innovations on well-characterized benchmark systems, and we lay out our vision for how this can be achieved.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularBenchmarkingBridged-Ring CompoundsComputer SimulationCucurbit(n)urilsDrug DiscoveryImidazolesLigandsMacrocyclic CompoundsMuramidaseProtein BindingProteinsSoftwareThermodynamicsBridged-Ring Compoundscucurbit(7)urilCucurbit(n)urilsImidazolesLigandsMacrocyclic CompoundsMuramidaseProteinsalchemicalbenchmarkbinding affinitybinding free energybiomolecular interactionsmolecular simulation

Identifiers

PMID28399632
PMCPMC5544526

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.