The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Extra Precision Glide: Docking and Scoring Incorporating a Model of Hydrophobic Enclosure for Protein−Ligand Complexes
Abstract
A novel scoring function to estimate protein-ligand binding affinities has been developed and implemented as the Glide 4.0 XP scoring function and docking protocol. In addition to unique water desolvation energy terms, protein-ligand structural motifs leading to enhanced binding affinity are included: (1) hydrophobic enclosure where groups of lipophilic ligand atoms are enclosed on opposite faces by lipophilic protein atoms, (2) neutral-neutral single or correlated hydrogen bonds in a hydrophobically enclosed environment, and (3) five categories of charged-charged hydrogen bonds. The XP scoring function and docking protocol have been developed to reproduce experimental binding affinities for a set of 198 complexes (RMSDs of 2.26 and 1.73 kcal/mol over all and well-docked ligands, respectively) and to yield quality enrichments for a set of fifteen screens of pharmaceutical importance. Enrichment results demonstrate the importance of the novel XP molecular recognition and water scoring in separating active and inactive ligands and avoiding false positives.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Friesner, R. A., Banks, J. L., Murphy, R. B., Halgren, T. A., Klicic, J. J., Mainz, D. T., Repasky, M. P., Knoll, E. H., Shelley, M., Perry, J. K., et al. (2004) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm0306430 · Cited by 10,057
Self-citationDevelopment and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking 1 1Edited by F. E. Cohen
Jones, G., Willett, P., Glen, R. C., Leach, A. R., & Taylor, R. (1997) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1996.0897 · Cited by 6,763
Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking.
Wang, R., Lu, Y., & Wang, S. (2003) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm0203783 · Cited by 849
A model binding site for testing scoring functions in molecular docking.
Wei, B. Q., Baase, W. A., Weaver, L. H., Matthews, B. W., & Shoichet, B. K. (2002) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/s0022-2836(02)00777-5 · Cited by 237
Cited by
Water as an active constituent in cell biology
Ball, P. (2008) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr068037a · Cited by 2,177
A practical guide to large-scale docking
Bender, B. J., Gahbauer, S., Luttens, A., Lyu, J., Webb, C. M., Stein, R. M., Fink, E. A., Balius, T. E., Carlsson, J., Irwin, J. J., et al. (2021) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/s41596-021-00597-z · Cited by 546
“Visual examination can catch these strained compounds, but various tools have been developed to systematically analyze hundreds or thousands of compounds making them useful in this setting 127 – 129 .”
MethodMoitessier, N., Englebienne, P., Lee, D., Lawandi, J., & Corbeil, C. R. (2008) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0707515 · Cited by 514
Guerrero, L., Castillo, J., Quiñones, M., Garcia-Vallvé, S., Arola, L., Pujadas, G., & Muguerza, B. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049493 · Cited by 391
Duin, E. C., Wagner, T., Shima, S., Prakash, D., Cronin, B., Yáñez-Ruiz, D. R., Duval, S., Rümbeli, R., Stemmler, R. T., Thauer, R. K., et al. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1600298113 · Cited by 339
Metadata
- Authors
- Friesner, R. A., Murphy, R. B., Repasky, M. P., Frye, L. L., Greenwood, J. R., Halgren, T. A., Sanschagrin, P. C., & Mainz, D. T.
- Venue
- Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2006-09-23
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 6177-6196
- ISSN
- 0022-2623 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-4804
- OpenAlex
- W2102377211
- Cited by
- 6,851
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 47.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
