ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2025
Evaluation of Small-Molecule Binding Site Prediction Methods on Membrane-Embedded Protein Interfaces.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Docking-score landscapes shape active-learning performance across Vina, Glide, and SILCS.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2026Article
- Integrated Framework for Probing Multimodal Protein Foundation Models with Structure-Functional Interpretability Analysis in Detection of Allosteric Binding Sites.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Revealing the mechanism of shaking/tumbling driving Wuyi rock tea Rougui to "fade green odor and reveal aroma" based on metabolomics and molecular docking technology.Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
- SwinSite: 3D Structure-Based Prediction of Protein-Ligand Binding Sites Using a Combined Vision Transformer and Convolution Model.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- Integrated computational screen and validation of thalidomide-based PROTACs targeting SARS-CoV-2 main protease.RSC medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increasing structural and biophysical evidence suggests that many drug molecules bind to the protein-membrane interface region in membrane protein structures. An important starting point for drug discovery is the determination of a ligand's binding site; however, this information is missing for many membrane proteins, especially for their membrane-embedded parts. Therefore, we tested the performance of computational methods for ligand binding site prediction in the protein intramembrane region. We compiled data sets containing GPCR- and ion channel-ligand complexes and compared method performance relative to a soluble protein data set obtained from PDBBind. We tested state-of-the-art geometry-based (Fpocket, ConCavity), energy probe-based (FTSite), machine learning-based (P2Rank, GRaSP), and deep learning-based (PUResNet, DeepPocket, PUResNetV2.0) methods and evaluated them using the center-to-center distance (DCC) and discretized volume overlap (DVO) between the predicted binding site and the actual ligand position. The three best-ranking methods based on success rates on GPCRs were DeepPocket, PUResNetV2.0, and ConCavity, and for ion channels, these were DeepPocket, PUResNetV2.0, and FTSite. However, average DCC and DVO values were lower for all methods compared to the soluble protein data set, for which DVO and normalized DCC values ranked between 0.33 and 0.72 in their best case, respectively. In conclusion, this study provides an overview of the performance of state-of-the-art binding site prediction methods on their ability to identify pockets in the protein-membrane interface region. It also underscores the need for further method development in the prediction of protein-membrane ligand binding sites.
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.