Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40455164›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2025

A Python-Based Workflow for Computing and Extracting Drug-Like Compounds from PubChem.

Suchismita Mahato

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Suchismita MahatoNational Institute of Technology, Jamshedpur, India. suchismita.cse@nitjsr.ac.in.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drugs play a crucial role in treating numerous diseases. However, not all compounds have the properties required to function effectively within biological systems. Lipinski's rule of five, a widely accepted guideline, helps assess drug-likeness by screening for molecular properties associated with bioavailability. To enhance the efficiency of computational drug discovery, especially for docking studies with viral targets, filters are applied to the vast array of compounds in public databases like PubChem. By excluding compounds unlikely to be effective as therapeutic agents, researchers can focus on those with higher potential, streamlining subsequent, computationally intensive analyses. This chapter introduces a python-based workflow for filtering PubChem Compounds, prioritizing those that meet Lipinski's criteria and are more likely to demonstrate biological efficacy. This approach can be used as an example for targeted and efficient drug development efforts.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDatabases, ChemicalDrug DiscoverySoftwareHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsWorkflowPharmaceutical PreparationsDrug discoveryDrug screeningLipinski’s rulePubChemTherapeuticsViral infectionsViruses

Identifiers

PMID40455164

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.