Cited by 1,318Computational Drug Discovery MethodsProtein Degradation and InhibitorsCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases

Benchmarking sets for molecular docking.

Open access
Huang, Niu, Shoichet, Brian K., Irwin, John J.·2006·Journal of Medicinal Chemistry

Abstract

Ligand enrichment among top-ranking hits is a key metric of molecular docking. To avoid bias, decoys should resemble ligands physically, so that enrichment is not simply a separation of gross features, yet be chemically distinct from them, so that they are unlikely to be binders. We have assembled a directory of useful decoys (DUD), with 2950 ligands for 40 different targets. Every ligand has 36 decoy molecules that are physically similar but topologically distinct, leading to a database of 98,266 compounds. For most targets, enrichment was at least half a log better with uncorrected databases such as the MDDR than with DUD, evidence of bias in the former. These calculations also allowed 40x40 cross-docking, where the enrichments of each ligand set could be compared for all 40 targets, enabling a specificity metric for the docking screens. DUD is freely available online as a benchmarking set for docking at http://blaster.docking.org/dud/.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/jm0608356

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Huang, N., Shoichet, B. K., & Irwin, J. J.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Shoichet, Brian K.
Venue
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
Published
2006-10-26
Volume
49
Issue
23
Pages
6789-6801
ISSN
  • 0022-2623 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-4804
OpenAlex
W2127760066
Cited by
1,318
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 70 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 75 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 75 · 2016: 71 · 2015: 98 · 2014: 89 · 2013: 97 · 2012: 100
FWCI
38.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Medicinal Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Inha University
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM71896, GM59957, R01GM059957, R01GM071896)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Degradation and Inhibitors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases
Keywords
molecular docking, decoy database, cross-docking, virtual screening
MeSH terms
Adenosine Deaminase, Aldehyde Reductase, Binding Sites, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Inhibins, Ligands, Models, Molecular, Protein Binding, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Receptors, Estrogen, Thymidine Kinase, Drug Design, Databases, Factual, Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship, p38 Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinases

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