Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37572302›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2023

Protein-ligand binding affinity prediction exploiting sequence constituent homology.

Abbi Abdel-Rehim, Oghenejokpeme Orhobor, Lou Hang, Hao Ni, Ross D King

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Abbi Abdel-RehimDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0AS, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3067-7365
Oghenejokpeme OrhoborThe National Institute of Agricultural Botany, Cambridge CB3 0LE, United Kingdom.
Lou HangDepartment of Mathematics, University College London, London WC1H 0AY, United Kingdom.
Hao NiDepartment of Mathematics, University College London, London WC1H 0AY, United Kingdom.
Ross D KingDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0AS, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7208-4387

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationMolecular docking is a commonly used approach for estimating binding conformations and their resultant binding affinities. Machine learning has been successfully deployed to enhance such affinity estimations. Many methods of varying complexity have been developed making use of some or all the spatial and categorical information available in these structures. The evaluation of such methods has mainly been carried out using datasets from PDBbind. Particularly the Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions (CASF) 2007, 2013, and 2016 datasets with dedicated test sets. This work demonstrates that only a small number of simple descriptors is necessary to efficiently estimate binding affinity for these complexes without the need to know the exact binding conformation of a ligand.

resultsThe developed approach of using a small number of ligand and protein descriptors in conjunction with gradient boosting trees demonstrates high performance on the CASF datasets. This includes the commonly used benchmark CASF2016 where it appears to perform better than any other approach. This methodology is also useful for datasets where the spatial relationship between the ligand and protein is unknown as demonstrated using a large ChEMBL-derived dataset. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Code and data uploaded to https://github.com/abbiAR/PLBAffinity.

Indexed as

Machine LearningProteinsLigandsMolecular Docking SimulationProtein BindingLigandsProteins

Identifiers

PMID37572302
PMCPMC10463547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.