The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Four-Dimensional Docking: A Fast and Accurate Account of Discrete Receptor Flexibility in Ligand Docking
Open accessAbstract
Many available methods aimed at incorporating the receptor flexibility in ligand docking are computationally expensive, require a high level of user intervention, and were tested only on benchmarks of limited size and diversity. Here we describe the four-dimensional (4D) docking approach that allows seamless incorporation of receptor conformational ensembles in a single docking simulation and reduces the sampling time while preserving the accuracy of traditional ensemble docking. The approach was tested on a benchmark of 99 therapeutically relevant proteins and 300 diverse ligands (half of them experimental or marketed drugs). The conformational variability of the binding pockets was represented by the available crystallographic data, with the total of 1113 receptor structures. The 4D docking method reproduced the correct ligand binding geometry in 77.3% of the benchmark cases, matching the success rate of the traditional approach but employed on average only one-fourth of the time during the ligand sampling phase.
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
Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery
Teague, S. J. (2003) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd1129 · Cited by 755
Moitessier, N., Englebienne, P., Lee, D., Lawandi, J., & Corbeil, C. R. (2008) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0707515 · Cited by 514
Flexible ligand docking to multiple receptor conformations: a practical alternative
Totrov, M., & Abagyan, R. (2008) · Current Opinion in Structural Biology · doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2008.01.004 · Cited by 497
Self-citation
Cited by
Advances and Challenges in Protein-Ligand Docking
Huang, S.-Y., & Zou, X. (2010) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms11083016 · Cited by 639
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
Normal Mode Analysis of Biomolecular Structures: Functional Mechanisms of Membrane Proteins
Bahar, I., Lezon, T. R., Bakan, A., & Shrivastava, I. H. (2010) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr900095e · Cited by 537
Synthon-based ligand discovery in virtual libraries of over 11 billion compounds
Sadybekov, A. A., Sadybekov, A. V., Liu, Y., Iliopoulos-Tsoutsouvas, C., Huang, X.-P., Pickett, J., Houser, B., Patel, N., Tran, N. K., Tong, F., et al. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04220-9 · Cited by 417
“The two LiBERO models, along with the crystal structure model, were combined into one 4D model as described previously 40 .”
MethodA Force Field with Discrete Displaceable Waters and Desolvation Entropy for Hydrated Ligand Docking
Forli, S., & Olson, A. J. (2012) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm2005145 · Cited by 290
Metadata
- Authors
- Bottegoni, G., Kufareva, I., Totrov, M., & Abagyan, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2008-12-17
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 397-406
- ISSN
- 0022-2623 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-4804
- OpenAlex
- W2012969029
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 20.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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.