Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39014286›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2024

MDFit: automated molecular simulations workflow enables high throughput assessment of ligands-protein dynamics.

Alexander C Brueckner, Benjamin Shields, Palani Kirubakaran, Alexander Suponya, Manoranjan Panda, Shana L Posy, Stephen Johnson, Sirish Kaushik Lakkaraju

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

8 authors.

Alexander C BruecknerMolecular Structure & Design, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA. bruecknera15@gmail.com.
Benjamin ShieldsMolecular Structure & Design, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA.
Palani KirubakaranBiocon Bristol Myers Squibb R&D Centre, Bangalore, 560099, Karnataka, India.
Alexander SuponyaMolecular Structure & Design, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA.
Manoranjan PandaMolecular Structure & Design, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA.
Shana L PosyMolecular Structure & Design, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA.
Stephen JohnsonMolecular Structure & Design, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA.
Sirish Kaushik LakkarajuMolecular Structure & Design, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA. kaushik.lakkaraju@bms.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Machine LearningMolecular Dynamics SimulationProtein BindingProteinsBinding SitesDrug DesignHumansLigandsMolecular Docking SimulationProtein ConformationSoftwareWorkflowLigandsProteinsautomated workflowsmachine learningMDMLmolecular dynamicspocket dynamicssimulation fingerprints

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.