ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2022
Maximizing the Performance of Similarity-Based Virtual Screening Methods by Generating Synergy from the Integration of 2D and 3D Approaches.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Combined Chemoinformatics- and Machine Learning-Based Approach Identifies Chlormidazole as a Drug Repurposing Candidate against Aggressive Prostate Cancer.Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Relating Model Performance to Embedding Distributions in Molecular Machine Learning.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- Repurposing Drugs for Inhibition against ALDH2 via a 2D/3D Ligand-Based Similarity Search and Molecular Simulation.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Methods for the pairwise comparison of 2D and 3D molecular structures are established approaches in virtual screening. In this work, we explored three strategies for maximizing the virtual screening performance of these methods: (i) the merging of hit lists obtained from multi-compound screening using a single screening method, (ii) the merging of the hit lists obtained from 2D and 3D screening by parallel selection, and (iii) the combination of both of these strategies in an integrated approach. We found that any of these strategies led to a boost in virtual screening performance, with the clearest advantages observed for the integrated approach. On test sets for virtual screening, covering 50 pharmaceutically relevant proteins, the integrated approach, using sets of five query molecules, yielded, on average, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84, an early enrichment among the top 1% of ranked compounds (EF1%) of 53.82 and a scaffold recovery rate among the top 1% of ranked compounds (SRR1%) of 0.50. In comparison, the 2D and 3D methods on their own (when using a single query molecule) yielded AUC values of 0.68 and 0.54, EF1% values of 19.96 and 17.52, and SRR1% values of 0.20 and 0.17, respectively. In conclusion, based on these results, the integration of 2D and 3D methods, via a (balanced) parallel selection strategy, is recommended, and, in particular, when combined with multi-query screening.
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.