ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2024
MDFit: automated molecular simulations workflow enables high throughput assessment of ligands-protein dynamics.
Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- In silico discovery of thioglycoside analogues as donor-site inhibitors of glycosyltransferase LgtC.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Computational approaches to druggable site identification: Current status and future perspective.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2026Review
- Solution structure determination and biophysical characterization studies of 7SK RNP and 7SL SRP RNAs.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Molecular docking and dynamics in protein serine/threonine kinase drug discovery: advances, challenges, and future perspectives.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Machine learning and molecular dynamics simulations predict potential TGR5 agonists for type 2 diabetes treatment.Frontiers in chemistry · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular dynamics (MD) simulation is a powerful tool for characterizing ligand-protein conformational dynamics and offers significant advantages over docking and other rigid structure-based computational methods. However, setting up, running, and analyzing MD simulations continues to be a multi-step process making it cumbersome to assess a library of ligands in a protein binding pocket using MD. We present an automated workflow that streamlines setting up, running, and analyzing Desmond MD simulations for protein-ligand complexes using machine learning (ML) models. The workflow takes a library of pre-docked ligands and a prepared protein structure as input, sets up and runs MD with each protein-ligand complex, and generates simulation fingerprints for each ligand. Simulation fingerprints (SimFP) capture protein-ligand compatibility, including stability of different ligand-pocket interactions and other useful metrics that enable easy rank-ordering of the ligand library for pocket optimization. SimFPs from a ligand library are used to build & deploy ML models that predict binding assay outcomes and automatically infer important interactions. Unlike relative free-energy methods that are constrained to assess ligands with high chemical similarity, ML models based on SimFPs can accommodate diverse ligand sets. We present two case studies on how SimFP helps delineate structure-activity relationship (SAR) trends and explain potency differences across matched-molecular pairs of (1) cyclic peptides targeting PD-L1 and (2) small molecule inhibitors targeting CDK9.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39014286What 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.