ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2021
Biased Docking for Protein-Ligand Pose Prediction.
Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging Consensus Docking Approaches for Human Mitochondrial Complexes I and III.Chemical research in toxicology · 2026Article
- Can Deep Learning Blind Docking Methods be Used to Predict Allosteric Compounds?Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Beyond Tanimoto: a learned bioactivity similarity index enhances ligand discovery.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- In Vitro and Computational Response of Differential Catalysis byInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- 5-chloro-3-(2-(2,4-dinitrophenyl) hydrazono)indolin-2-one: synthesis, characterization, biochemical and computational screening against SARS-CoV-2.Chemicke zvesti · 2024Article
- Article
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
Abstract
The interaction between a protein and its ligands is one of the basic and most important processes in biological chemistry. Docking methods aim to predict the molecular 3D structure of protein-ligand complexes starting from coordinates of the protein and the ligand separately. They are widely used in both industry and academia, especially in the context of drug development projects. AutoDock4 is one of the most popular docking tools and, as for any docking method, its performance is highly system dependent. Knowledge about specific protein-ligand interactions on a particular target can be used to successfully overcome this limitation. Here, we describe how to apply the AutoDock Bias protocol, a simple and elegant strategy that allows users to incorporate target-specific information through a modified scoring function that biases the ligand structure towards those poses (or conformations) that establish selected interactions. We discuss two examples using different bias sources. In the first, we show how to steer dockings towards interactions derived from crystal structures of the receptor with different ligands; in the second example, we define and apply hydrophobic biases derived from Molecular Dynamics simulations in mixed solvents. Finally, we discuss general concepts of biased docking, its performance in pose prediction, and virtual screening campaigns as well as other potential applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.