Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30415285›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2018

Overview of the SAMPL6 host-guest binding affinity prediction challenge.

Andrea Rizzi, Steven Murkli, John N McNeill, Wei Yao, Matthew Sullivan, Michael K Gilson, Michael W Chiu, Lyle Isaacs, Bruce C Gibb, David L Mobley and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing 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

76 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Partially Sulfated Pillar[5]Arenes: Synthesis and Molecular Recognition Properties.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Tuning Potential Functions to Host-Guest Binding Data.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. An updated synthesis ofSupramolecular chemistry · 2023
    Article
  18. An overview of the SAMPL8 host-guest binding challenge.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 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

11 authors.

Andrea RizziComputational and Systems Biology Program, Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7693-2013
Steven MurkliDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1563-0139
John N McNeillDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8401-2388
Wei YaoDepartment of Chemistry, Tulane University, Louisiana, LA, 70118, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4229-0486
Matthew SullivanDepartment of Chemistry, Tulane University, Louisiana, LA, 70118, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8112-2848
Michael K GilsonSkaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3375-1738
Michael W ChiuQualcomm Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Lyle IsaacsDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4079-332X
Bruce C GibbDepartment of Chemistry, Tulane University, Louisiana, LA, 70118, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4478-4084
David L MobleyDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Department of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine, California, 92697, USA. dmobley@uci.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1083-5533
John D ChoderaComputational and Systems Biology Program, Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA. john.chodera@choderalab.org.ORCID 0000-0003-0542-119X

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
THEORY AND MODELING OF NONCOVALENT BINDINGR01GM061300 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MD BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE · PI GILSON, MICHAEL K. · 2000 to 2021
$7.2M
AN OPEN RESOURCE TO ADVANCE COMPUTER-AIDED DRUG DESIGNU01GM111528 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI AMARO, ROMMIE E, GILSON, MICHAEL K. · 2014 to 2018
$3.6M
Computational alchemy for molecular design and optimizationR01GM108889 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI MOBLEY, DAVID LOWELL · 2014 to 2022
$2.5M
Advancing predictive physical modeling through focused development of model systems to drive new modeling innovationsR01GM124270 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI MOBLEY, DAVID LOWELL · 2018 to 2021
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM061300NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM108889NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM124270NIGMS NIH HHS U01 GM111528
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurately predicting the binding affinities of small organic molecules to biological macromolecules can greatly accelerate drug discovery by reducing the number of compounds that must be synthesized to realize desired potency and selectivity goals. Unfortunately, the process of assessing the accuracy of current computational approaches to affinity prediction against binding data to biological macromolecules is frustrated by several challenges, such as slow conformational dynamics, multiple titratable groups, and the lack of high-quality blinded datasets. Over the last several SAMPL blind challenge exercises, host-guest systems have emerged as a practical and effective way to circumvent these challenges in assessing the predictive performance of current-generation quantitative modeling tools, while still providing systems capable of possessing tight binding affinities. Here, we present an overview of the SAMPL6 host-guest binding affinity prediction challenge, which featured three supramolecular hosts: octa-acid (OA), the closely related tetra-endo-methyl-octa-acid (TEMOA), and cucurbit[8]uril (CB8), along with 21 small organic guest molecules. A total of 119 entries were received from ten participating groups employing a variety of methods that spanned from electronic structure and movable type calculations in implicit solvent to alchemical and potential of mean force strategies using empirical force fields with explicit solvent models. While empirical models tended to obtain better performance than first-principle methods, it was not possible to identify a single approach that consistently provided superior results across all host-guest systems and statistical metrics. Moreover, the accuracy of the methodologies generally displayed a substantial dependence on the system considered, emphasizing the need for host diversity in blind evaluations. Several entries exploited previous experimental measurements of similar host-guest systems in an effort to improve their physical-based predictions via some manner of rudimentary machine learning; while this strategy succeeded in reducing systematic errors, it did not correspond to an improvement in statistical correlation. Comparison to previous rounds of the host-guest binding free energy challenge highlights an overall improvement in the correlation obtained by the affinity predictions for OA and TEMOA systems, but a surprising lack of improvement regarding root mean square error over the past several challenge rounds. The data suggests that further refinement of force field parameters, as well as improved treatment of chemical effects (e.g., buffer salt conditions, protonation states), may be required to further enhance predictive accuracy.

Indexed as

Bridged-Ring CompoundsCarboxylic AcidsComputer SimulationCucurbit(n)urilsCycloparaffinsDrug DesignImidazolesLigandsMacrocyclic CompoundsMolecular StructureProtein BindingProteinsSoftwareThermodynamicsBridged-Ring CompoundsCarboxylic Acidscucurbit(8)urilCucurbit(n)urilsCycloparaffinsImidazolesLigandsMacrocyclic CompoundsProteinsBinding affinityBlind challengeCucurbit[8]urilFree energyHost–guestOcta-acidSAMPL6

Identifiers

PMID30415285
PMCPMC6301044

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.