Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36057867›Full record

ReviewMolecular diversity2023

Docking covalent targets for drug discovery: stimulating the computer-aided drug design community of possible pitfalls and erroneous practices.

Abdul-Quddus Kehinde Oyedele, Abdeen Tunde Ogunlana, Ibrahim Damilare Boyenle, Ayodeji Oluwadamilare Adeyemi, Temionu Oluwakemi Rita, Temitope Isaac Adelusi, Misbaudeen Abdul-Hammed, Oluwabamise Emmanuel Elegbeleye, Tope Tunji Odunitan

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular diversity, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Abdul-Quddus Kehinde OyedeleComputational Biology/Drug Discovery Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Abdeen Tunde OgunlanaComputational Biology/Drug Discovery Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Ibrahim Damilare BoyenleComputational Biology/Drug Discovery Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria. idboyenle@student.lautech.edu.ng.
Ayodeji Oluwadamilare AdeyemiDepartment of Medical Laboratory Technology, Lagos State College of Health, Lagos, Nigeria.
Temionu Oluwakemi RitaDepartment of Medical Laboratory Technology, Lagos State College of Health, Lagos, Nigeria.
Temitope Isaac AdelusiComputational Biology/Drug Discovery Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Misbaudeen Abdul-HammedDepartment of Pure and Applied Chemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Oluwabamise Emmanuel ElegbeleyeComputational Biology/Drug Discovery Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Tope Tunji OdunitanDepartment of Biochemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Ladoke Akintola University of Technology · NGLagos State University · NG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The continuous approval of covalent drugs in recent years for the treatment of diseases has led to an increased search for covalent agents by medicinal chemists and computational scientists worldwide. In the computational parlance, molecular docking which is a popular tool to investigate the interaction of a ligand and a protein target, does not account for the formation of covalent bond, and the increasing application of these conventional programs to covalent targets in early drug discovery practice is a matter of utmost concern. Thus, in this comprehensive review, we sought to educate the docking community about the realization of covalent docking and the existence of suitable programs to make their future virtual-screening events on covalent targets worthwhile and scientifically rational. More interestingly, we went beyond the classical description of the functionality of covalent-docking programs down to selecting the 'best' program to consult with during a virtual-screening campaign based on receptor class and covalent warhead chemistry. In addition, we made a highlight on how covalent docking could be achieved using random conventional docking software. And lastly, we raised an alert on the growing erroneous molecular docking practices with covalent targets. Our aim is to guide scientists in the rational docking pursuit when dealing with covalent targets, as this will reduce false-positive results and also increase the reliability of their work for translational research.

Indexed as

Drug DesignDrug DiscoveryComputer-Aided DesignLigandsMolecular Docking SimulationProtein BindingReproducibility of ResultsLigandsCovalent dockingCovalent targetsDrug discoveryLigand warhead chemistryMedicinal chemistry

Identifiers

PMID36057867
PMCPMC9441019
OpenAlexW4294556198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.