ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2023
Prediction of protein-ligand binding affinity with deep learning.
Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural Knowledge Is What Matters in Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Structure-guided compound prioritization strategy for virtual screening identifies putative binders for the nuclear receptor LRH-1.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Reproducibility, validation, and failure modes across classical and AI-driven molecular docking.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2026Review
- Machine Learning to Predict CDK4 Inhibition.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Prompt-based multimodal representation learning for drug repurposing.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Protein-ligand affinity prediction via Jensen-Shannon divergence of molecular dynamics simulation trajectories.Biophysics and physicobiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Integrating Explicit and Implicit Fullerene Models into UNRES Force Field for Protein Interaction Studies.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- GIHP: Graph convolutional neural network based interpretable pan-specific HLA-peptide binding affinity prediction.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Advances in Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction via Deep Learning: A Comprehensive Study of Datasets, Data Preprocessing Techniques, and Model Architectures.Current drug targets · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prediction of binding affinities between target proteins and small molecule drugs is essential for speeding up the drug research and design process. To attain precise and effective affinity prediction, computer-aided methods are employed in the drug discovery pipeline. In the last decade, a variety of computational methods has been developed, with deep learning being the most commonly used approach. We have gathered several deep learning methods and classified them into convolutional neural networks (CNNs), graph neural networks (GNNs), and Transformers for analysis and discussion. Initially, we conducted an analysis of the different deep learning methods, focusing on their feature construction and model architecture. We discussed the advantages and disadvantages of each model. Subsequently, we conducted experiments using four deep learning methods on the PDBbind v.2016 core set. We evaluated their prediction capabilities in various affinity intervals and statistically and visually analyzed the samples of correct and incorrect predictions for each model. Through visual analysis, we attempted to combine the strengths of the four models to improve the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of predicted affinities by 1.6% (reducing the absolute value to 1.101) and the Pearson Correlation Coefficient (R) by 2.9% (increasing the absolute value to 0.894) compared to the current state-of-the-art method. Lastly, we discussed the challenges faced by current deep learning methods in affinity prediction and proposed potential solutions to address these issues.
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.