Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33044994›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Assessing multiple score functions in Rosetta for drug discovery.

Shannon T Smith, Jens Meiler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A generalizable deep learning framework for structure-based protein-ligand affinity ranking.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Recent Advances in Automated Structure-Based De Novo Drug Design.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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.

Shannon T SmithChemical and Physical Biology Program, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1225-8928
Jens MeilerCenter for Structural Biology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8945-193X

Funding

Hybridized structure- and ligand- based drug discovery approaches targeting ASCT2, an amino acid transporter critical for upregulated cell proliferation in numerous cancer typesF31CA243353 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI SMITH, SHANNON TALLI · 2019 to 2022
$106k
NCI NIH HHS F31 CA243353
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rosetta is a computational software suite containing algorithms for a wide variety of macromolecular structure prediction and design tasks including small molecule protocols commonly used in drug discovery or enzyme design. Here, we benchmark RosettaLigand score functions and protocols in comparison to results of other software recently published in the Comparative Assessment of Score Functions (CASF-2016). The CASF-2016 benchmark covers a wide variety of tests including scoring and ranking multiple compounds against a target, ligand docking of a small molecule to a target, and virtual screening to extract binders from a compound library. Direct comparison to the score functions provided by CASF-2016 results shows that the original RosettaLigand score function ranks among the top software for scoring, ranking, docking and screening tests. Most notably, the RosettaLigand score function ranked 2/34 among other report score functions in CASF-2016. We additionally perform a ligand docking test with full sampling to mimic typical use cases. Despite improved performance of newer score functions in canonical protein structure prediction and design, we demonstrate here that more recent Rosetta score functions have reduced performance across all small molecule benchmarks. The tests described here have also been uploaded to the Rosetta scientific benchmarking server and will be run weekly to track performance as the code is continually being developed.

Indexed as

SoftwareDatasets as TopicHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsProteinsPharmaceutical PreparationsProteins

Identifiers

PMID33044994
PMCPMC7549810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.