ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2023
Water Networks in Complexes between Proteins and FDA-Approved Drugs.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2023. 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.
- WatCon: A Python Tool for Analysis of Conserved Water Networks Across Protein Families.JACS Au · 2025Article
- Decoding BCL6 Inhibitors: Computational Insights into the Impact of Water Networks on Potency.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Accelerating fragment-based drug discovery using grand canonical nonequilibrium candidate Monte Carlo.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Molecular biophysics and inhibition mechanism of influenza virus A M2 viroporin by adamantane-based drugs - Challenges in designing antiviral agents.Journal of structural biology: X · 2025Article
- ARIP: A Tool for Precise Interatomic Contact Area and Volume Calculation in Proteins.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- OneOPES, a Combined Enhanced Sampling Method to Rule Them All.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Water molecules at protein-ligand interfaces are often of significant pharmaceutical interest, owing in part to the entropy which can be released upon the displacement of an ordered water by a therapeutic compound. Protein structures may not, however, completely resolve all critical bound water molecules, or there may be no experimental data available. As such, predicting the location of water molecules in the absence of a crystal structure is important in the context of rational drug design. Grand canonical Monte Carlo (GCMC) is a computational technique that is gaining popularity for the simulation of buried water sites. In this work, we assess the ability of GCMC to accurately predict water binding locations, using a dataset that we have curated, containing 108 unique structures of complexes between proteins and Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved small-molecule drugs. We show that GCMC correctly predicts 81.4% of nonbulk crystallographic water sites to within 1.4 Å. However, our analysis demonstrates that the reported performance of water prediction methods is highly sensitive to the way in which the performance is measured. We also find that crystallographic water sites with more protein/ligand hydrogen bonds and stronger electron density are more reliably predicted by GCMC. An analysis of water networks revealed that more than half of the structures contain at least one ligand-contacting water network. In these cases, displacement of a water site by a ligand modification might yield unexpected results if the larger network is destabilized. Cooperative effects between waters should therefore be explicitly considered in structure-based drug design.
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.