Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37862058›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2023

Comparison of Equilibrium and Nonequilibrium Approaches for Relative Binding Free Energy Predictions.

Shunzhou Wan, Agastya P Bhati, Peter V Coveney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Automated Adaptive Absolute Binding Free Energy Calculations.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Ensemble-Based Approaches Ensure Reliability and Reproducibility.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Shunzhou WanCentre for Computational Science, Department of Chemistry, University College London, London WC1H 0AJ, U.K.ORCID 0000-0001-7192-1999
Agastya P BhatiCentre for Computational Science, Department of Chemistry, University College London, London WC1H 0AJ, U.K.
Peter V CoveneyCentre for Computational Science, Department of Chemistry, University College London, London WC1H 0AJ, U.K.ORCID 0000-0002-8787-7256

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alchemical relative binding free energy calculations have recently found important applications in drug optimization. A series of congeneric compounds are generated from a preidentified lead compound, and their relative binding affinities to a protein are assessed in order to optimize candidate drugs. While methods based on equilibrium thermodynamics have been extensively studied, an approach based on nonequilibrium methods has recently been reported together with claims of its superiority. However, these claims pay insufficient attention to the basis and reliability of both methods. Here we report a comparative study of the two approaches across a large data set, comprising more than 500 ligand transformations spanning in excess of 300 ligands binding to a set of 14 diverse protein targets. Ensemble methods are essential to quantify the uncertainty in these calculations, not only for the reasons already established in the equilibrium approach but also to ensure that the nonequilibrium calculations reside within their domain of validity. If and only if ensemble methods are applied, we find that the nonequilibrium method can achieve accuracy and precision comparable to those of the equilibrium approach. Compared to the equilibrium method, the nonequilibrium approach can reduce computational costs but introduces higher computational complexity and longer wall clock times. There are, however, cases where the standard length of a nonequilibrium transition is not sufficient, necessitating a complete rerun of the entire set of transitions. This significantly increases the computational cost and proves to be highly inconvenient during large-scale applications. Our findings provide a key set of recommendations that should be adopted for the reliable implementation of nonequilibrium approaches to relative binding free energy calculations in ligand-protein systems.

Indexed as

Molecular Dynamics SimulationProteinsEntropyLigandsProtein BindingReproducibility of ResultsThermodynamicsLigandsProteins

Identifiers

PMID37862058
PMCPMC10653111

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.