Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36923913›Full record

ReviewACS medicinal chemistry letters2023

Recent Advances in Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations for Drug Discovery.

Ingo Muegge, Yuan Hu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS medicinal chemistry letters, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. How many crystal structures do you need to trust your docking results?bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Quasi-Bound State as a Predictor of Relative Binding Free Energy.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The physics-AI dialogue in drug design.RSC medicinal chemistry · 2025
    Review
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.

Ingo MueggeAlkermes, Inc, 852 Winter Street, Waltham, Massachusetts 02451-1420, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3294-1852
Yuan HuFrontier Medicines Corp, 451 D Street, Suite 207, Boston, Massachusetts 02210, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1014-6594

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rigorous physics-based methods to calculate binding free energies of protein-ligand complexes have become a valued component of structure-based drug design. Relative and absolute binding free energy calculations have been deployed prospectively in support of solving diverse drug discovery challenges. Here we review recent applications of binding free energy calculations to fragment growing and linking, scaffold hopping, binding pose validation, virtual screening, covalent enzyme inhibition, and positional analogue scanning. Furthermore, we discuss the merits of using protein models and highlight recent efforts to replace costly binding free energy calculations with predictions from machine learning models trained on a limited number of free energy perturbation or thermodynamic integration calculations thereby allowing for extended chemical space exploration.

Identifiers

PMID36923913
PMCPMC10009785

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.