Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32669436›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020

Machine learning classification can reduce false positives in structure-based virtual screening.

Yusuf O Adeshina, Eric J Deeds, John Karanicolas

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing 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

96 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Rescuing the Function of Missense-Mutated Tumor SuppressorbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Quo Vadis translational neuroscience?Translational neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  16. Coumarin benzamide scaffold as potential 5-HTJournal of molecular modeling · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 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

3 authors.

Yusuf O AdeshinaProgram in Molecular Therapeutics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111.
Eric J DeedsCenter for Computational Biology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045.
John KaranicolasProgram in Molecular Therapeutics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111; john.karanicolas@fccc.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-0300-726X

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Dietmar J Kappes · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
Identifying stabilizers of p53 using pocket complementarityR01GM112736 · NIGMS · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI KARANICOLAS, JOHN · 2016 to 2019
$1.6M
Robust Rational Design of Chemical Tools to Inhibit RNA-binding ProteinsR01GM123336 · NIGMS · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI KARANICOLAS, JOHN · 2017 to 2020
$1.5M
Identifying inhibitors of protein interactions using pocket optimizationR01GM099959 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAWRENCE · PI KARANICOLAS, JOHN · 2012 to 2016
$1.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM099959NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM112736NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM123336
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the recent explosion in the size of libraries available for screening, virtual screening is positioned to assume a more prominent role in early drug discovery's search for active chemical matter. In typical virtual screens, however, only about 12% of the top-scoring compounds actually show activity when tested in biochemical assays. We argue that most scoring functions used for this task have been developed with insufficient thoughtfulness into the datasets on which they are trained and tested, leading to overly simplistic models and/or overtraining. These problems are compounded in the literature because studies reporting new scoring methods have not validated their models prospectively within the same study. Here, we report a strategy for building a training dataset (D-COID) that aims to generate highly compelling decoy complexes that are individually matched to available active complexes. Using this dataset, we train a general-purpose classifier for virtual screening (vScreenML) that is built on the XGBoost framework. In retrospective benchmarks, our classifier shows outstanding performance relative to other scoring functions. In a prospective context, nearly all candidate inhibitors from a screen against acetylcholinesterase show detectable activity; beyond this, 10 of 23 compounds have IC

Indexed as

Machine LearningDatabases, ProteinDrug DiscoveryDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHumansSmall Molecule LibrariesSmall Molecule Librariesmachine learning classifierprotein–ligand complexstructure-based drug designvirtual screening

Identifiers

PMID32669436
PMCPMC7414157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.