Cited by 57Computational Drug Discovery MethodsAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesProtein Structure and Dynamics

Shedding light on important waters for drug design: simulations versus grid-based methods.

Bucher, Denis, Stouten, Pieter, Triballeau, Nicolas·2018·Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Abstract

Water molecules play an important role in the association of drugs with their pharmaceutical targets. For this reason, calculating the energetic contribution of water is essential to make accurate predictions of compounds' affinity and selectivity. Water molecules can also modify the binding mode of compounds by forming water bridges, or clusters, that stabilize a particular orientation of the ligand. Several computational methods have been developed for solvent mapping, but few studies have attempted to compare them in a drug design context. In this paper, four commercially available solvent mapping tools (SZMAP, WaterFLAP, 3D-RISM, and WaterMap) are evaluated on three different protein targets. The methods were compared by looking at their ability to predict the structure-activity relations of lead compounds. All methods were found to be useful to some degree and to improve the predictions from docking alone. However, the only simulation-based approach tested, WaterMap, was found in some cases to be more accurate than grid-based methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00642

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many solvent mapping methods evaluated on real drug design studies showed that solvent mapping methods could be important to help ligand optimization and to correctly rank compounds to assist synthetic prioritization.

    “Many solvent mapping methods were evaluated on real drug design studies in a recent paper (Bucher et al., 2018), showing that solvent mapping methods could be important to help ligand optimization and to correctly rank compounds to assist synthetic prioritization.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bucher, D., Stouten, P., & Triballeau, N.
Affiliations
  • Galapagos (France) (FR)
  • Galapagos (Belgium) (BE)
Corresponding author
Bucher, Denis
Venue
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
Published
2018-02-28
Volume
58
Issue
3
Pages
692-699
ISSN
  • 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-960X
OpenAlex
W2794400040
Cited by
57
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8
FWCI
6.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Chemical Physics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
water bridges, water clusters, structure-activity relationship, 3D-RISM, molecular dynamics simulation, drug design, binding affinity prediction
MeSH terms
Lysophospholipase D, Animals, Binding Sites, Humans, Ligands, Models, Molecular, Phosphoric Diester Hydrolases, Phosphotransferases, Protein Binding, Thermodynamics, Water, Drug Design, Mice, Drug Discovery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review