ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2023
Two-Step Covalent Docking with Attracting Cavities.
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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attracting Cavities 3.0: faster and more versatile molecular docking for the SwissDock webserver.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Integrating Pharmacogenomics and Network Topology for Machine Learning Prediction of HLA-Associated Severe Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Hybrid quantum/classical docking of covalent and non-covalent ligands with Attracting Cavities.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Covalent Docking to the Active Sites of Thiamine Diphosphate-Dependent Enzymes.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The covalent docking software landscape: features and applications in drug design.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- CarsiDock-Cov: A deep learning-guided approach for automated covalent docking and screening.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Article
- Structure-based rational design of covalent probes.Communications chemistry · 2025Review
- Flavonoids as Promising Akt1 Inhibitors in Cancer Medicine: Insights From Molecular Docking, Dynamics, DFT Calculations, and In Vitro Validation.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Theoretical study of the formation of inclusion complexes with some terpenes using different solvating models.Journal of molecular modeling · 2025Article
- Review
- SwissDock 2024: major enhancements for small-molecule docking with Attracting Cavities and AutoDock Vina.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to their various advantages, interest in the development of covalent drugs has been renewed in the past few years. It is therefore important to accurately describe and predict their interactions with biological targets by computer-aided drug design tools such as docking algorithms. Here, we report a covalent docking procedure for our in-house docking code Attracting Cavities (AC), which mimics the two-step mechanism of covalent ligand binding. Ligand binding to the protein cavity is driven by nonbonded interactions, followed by the formation of a covalent bond between the ligand and the protein through a chemical reaction. To test the performance of this method, we developed a diverse, high-quality, openly accessible re-docking benchmark set of 95 covalent complexes bound by 8 chemical reactions to 5 different reactive amino acids. Combination with structures from previous studies resulted in a set of 304 complexes, on which AC obtained a success rate (rmsd ≤ 2 Å) of 78%, outperforming two state-of-the-art covalent docking codes, genetic optimization for ligand docking (GOLD (66%)) and AutoDock (AD (35%)). Using a more stringent success criterion (rmsd ≤ 1.5 Å), AC reached a success rate of 71 vs 55% for GOLD and 26% for AD. We additionally assessed the cross-docking performance of AC on a set of 76 covalent complexes of the SARS-CoV-2 main protease. On this challenging test set of mainly small and highly solvent-exposed ligands, AC yielded success rates of 58 and 28% for re-docking and cross-docking, respectively, compared to 45 and 17% for GOLD.
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.