ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2019
Evaluation of different virtual screening strategies on the basis of compound sets with characteristic core distributions and dissimilarity relationships.
Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploration of Novel Chemical Spaces to Discover JAK1 Inhibitors: An Ensemble Docking-Guided Deep Learning Approach.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Bridging Structure- and Ligand-Based Virtual Screening through Fragmented Interaction Fingerprint.ACS omega · 2024Article
- Scaffold-Hopped Compound Identification by Ligand-Based Approaches with a Prospective Affinity Test.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2024Article
- Comparing predictive ability of QSAR/QSPR models using 2D and 3D molecular representations.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, computational compound screening strategies on the basis of two- and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) molecular representations were investigated including similarity searching and support vector machine (SVM) ranking. Calculations based on topological fingerprints and molecular shape queries and features were compared. A unique aspect of the analysis setting apart from previous comparisons of 2D and 3D virtual screening approaches has been the design of compound reference, training, and test data sets with controlled incremental increases in intra-set structural diversity and different categories of structural relationships between reference/training and test sets. The use of these data sets made it possible to assess the relative performance of 2D and 3D screening strategies under increasingly challenging conditions ultimately leading to the use of training and test sets with essentially unrelated structures. The results showed that 3D similarity searching had little advantage over 2D searching in identifying active compounds with remote structural relationships. However, 3D SVM models trained on the basis of shape features were superior to other approaches (including 2D SVM) when the detection of structure-activity relationships became increasingly challenging. Such 3D SVM methods has thus far only been little investigated in virtual screening, proving a wealth of opportunities for further analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31435894What 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.